Benefit fraud is minuscule when compared to corporate tax avoidance. Preventing all benefit fraud would make virtually no difference. To give you an example from the UK, benefit fraud costs the country around £200million. London banks, despite being practically bankrupt paid £11 billion in bonus in 2008 (the height of the recession), whilst Vodafone have just negotiated a deal whereby they avoid being taken to court by HMRC for £7 billion in unpaid taxes, and pay just £1 billion instead.
It is amazing how well the right wing media manage to attack the poor repeatedly and have the middle classes lap it up. They let the right steal 100s off them, whilst complaining the poor are taking pennies.
Simply cutting benefits doesn't work. You have 3 choices:
1)Pay more taxes to provide benefits to support those at the lower income levels 2)Pay more for goods and services to allow companies to pay a living wage (thus saving benefits) 3)Pay more taxes to pay for more police and prisons as you create more criminals as it becomes more difficult to live properly by legal means.
I'll help you out, option 2 is the cheapest, but require companies to make smaller profits for the good of society, and the citizens to have the foresight that paying a little extra at Walmart to save taxes is a good deal.
Option 1 is the next cheapest.
Option 3 is by far the most expensive, but what most right wing voters seems to want (i.e. tough on crime and tax/benefit cuts)
Benefit fraud is minuscule when compared to corporate tax avoidance. Preventing all benefit fraud would make virtually no difference. To give you an example from the UK, benefit fraud costs the country around £200million. London banks, despite being practically bankrupt paid £11 billion in bonus in 2008 (the height of the recession), whilst Vodafone have just negotiated a deal whereby they avoid being taken to court by HMRC for £7 billion in unpaid taxes, and pay just £1 billion instead.
It is amazing how well the right wing media manage to attack the poor repeatedly and have the middle classes lap it up. They let the right steal 100s of them, whilst complaining the poor are taking pennies.
Complaining about Corporate tax avoidance is just as much scare mongering rubbish as blaming benefit cheats. Corporations and the self employed have every right to arrange their affairs to avoid tax within the law. What we should be talking about, much like the cost of the welfare state, is how the government through legislation can close loop holes that leave the system open to being ethically abused.
How so? It would be far cheaper to administer than the current benefits system, everyone has a basic income. Those that work hard get to keep more and those who don't will presumably actually get a smaller income than they currently do on benefits. It also keeps things like the rental market etc in check.
I'm probably more right leaning in the centre and the more time goes on the more appealing I think universal basic income is.
I like the idea of a universal income as well but I can't see how the sums add up. What level would you set it at? I think the trouble is, to be enough of a safety net, it would be unaffordable. Even £5K a year per adult would be £225bn a year, which is twice as much as our current welfare budget. Not sure £100 a week would be enough for folks with disability issues or would cover hosing costs for many.
Benefit fraud is minuscule when compared to corporate tax avoidance. Preventing all benefit fraud would make virtually no difference. To give you an example from the UK, benefit fraud costs the country around £200million. London banks, despite being practically bankrupt paid £11 billion in bonus in 2008 (the height of the recession), whilst Vodafone have just negotiated a deal whereby they avoid being taken to court by HMRC for £7 billion in unpaid taxes, and pay just £1 billion instead.
It is amazing how well the right wing media manage to attack the poor repeatedly and have the middle classes lap it up. They let the right steal 100s of them, whilst complaining the poor are taking pennies.
Complaining about Corporate tax avoidance is just as much scare mongering rubbish as blaming benefit cheats. Corporations and the self employed have every right to arrange their affairs to avoid tax within the law. What we should be talking about, much like the cost of the welfare state, is how the government through legislation can close loop holes that leave the system open to being ethically abused.
Not really, generally speaking (and it's more true in the US than it is in the UK), the tax code is written for the benefit of the corporations. They spend huge amounts on lobbyists to ensure the very loopholes they exploit exist in the first place and aren't fixed. On the other side, those on benefits have zero input into rules regarding how much they can get.
The cheapest root for society as a whole is to ensure a living wage. Walmart have no reason, beyond greed, to pay their staff below a living wage. If we are saying that western capitalism can allow you to work for one of the richest companies in the world, for 40 hours a week, and you not earn enough to live on, so that you require the government (and therefore every tax payer) to subsidise both your wages and therefore Walmart's profits, then capitalism has failed as a system.
Not everyone has the ability to improve themselves and get off that bottom rung, and our society will always have minimum wage jobs. We either need to ensure those on the minimum wages get benefits to allow them to live, or to ensure the minimum wage is enough to live on. If it's not then why would anybody chose to work 40 hours a week instead of working zero hours a week and live on benefits?
And that's the problem, too many don't want to pay the benefits, nor pay for a living wage, even though they'll likely pay less taxes because of it. So what are we left with? A disenchanted underclass who cannot earn enough to live on. That is why there is a benefits culture, because too many jobs now mean you are worse off working then earning benefits. The solution isn't to make it as difficult to live on benefits as it is to live on the minimum wages. It's to increase wages and lower taxation to the point where working is always the better option, and that an honest days work is enough to live on.
Benefit fraud is minuscule when compared to corporate tax avoidance. Preventing all benefit fraud would make virtually no difference. To give you an example from the UK, benefit fraud costs the country around £200million. London banks, despite being practically bankrupt paid £11 billion in bonus in 2008 (the height of the recession), whilst Vodafone have just negotiated a deal whereby they avoid being taken to court by HMRC for £7 billion in unpaid taxes, and pay just £1 billion instead.
It is amazing how well the right wing media manage to attack the poor repeatedly and have the middle classes lap it up. They let the right steal 100s of them, whilst complaining the poor are taking pennies.
Complaining about Corporate tax avoidance is just as much scare mongering rubbish as blaming benefit cheats. Corporations and the self employed have every right to arrange their affairs to avoid tax within the law. What we should be talking about, much like the cost of the welfare state, is how the government through legislation can close loop holes that leave the system open to being ethically abused.
Not really, generally speaking (and it's more true in the US than it is in the UK), the tax code is written for the benefit of the corporations. They spend huge amounts on lobbyists to ensure the very loopholes they exploit exist in the first place and aren't fixed. On the other side, those on benefits have zero input into rules regarding how much they can get.
The cheapest root for society as a whole is to ensure a living wage. Walmart have no reason, beyond greed, to pay their staff below a living wage. If we are saying that western capitalism can allow you to work for one of the richest companies in the world, for 40 hours a week, and you not earn enough to live on, so that you require the government (and therefore every tax payer) to subsidise both your wages and therefore Walmart's profits, then capitalism has failed as a system.
Not everyone has the ability to improve themselves and get off that bottom rung, and our society will always have minimum wage jobs. We either need to ensure those on the minimum wages get benefits to allow them to live, or to ensure the minimum wage is enough to live on. If it's not then why would anybody chose to work 40 hours a week instead of working zero hours a week and live on benefits?
And that's the problem, too many don't want to pay the benefits, nor pay for a living wage, even though they'll likely pay less taxes because of it. So what are we left with? A disenchanted underclass who cannot earn enough to live on. That is why there is a benefits culture, because too many jobs now mean you are worse off working then earning benefits. The solution isn't to make it as difficult to live on benefits as it is to live on the minimum wages. It's to increase wages and lower taxation to the point where working is always the better option, and that an honest days work is enough to live on.
There are other issues at play, such as the self respect and pride that employment normally brings. Working should always be the better option. How much is enough to live on is a very subjective issue. For example I survived and supported my family for 4 years on negative income. That is only possible by working hard, saving hard, and making sacrifices in order to accumulate enough over the years to be able to survive such a bad period by calling on ones savings, rather than seeking government assistance. We now seem to have a culture where people seem to want everything even if they cant afford it. For example saving for years to accumulate enough cash to be able to afford a nice car, has been replaced with simply chucking it on the credit card along with everything else. Corporate greed is definitely a big problem, but the debt addicted, impatient public who have forgotten the concept of "don't buy what you cant afford" are not entirely innocent.
I agreed about the want it now, credit addicted culture that has grown prevalent, but Western capitalism requires it to exist. We need the economic version of perpetual motion, namely unending growth. The requires ever greater amounts of money to be created and spent, and that's what credit does. It allows banks to create money literally out of thin air. This ever increasing look if money leads to inflation, and then to increased wages and borrowing and the whole thing happily trundles on until explodes.
Each time there is a natural correction, I.e crash and recession, the top 1% are largely protected by their wealth and then set about ensuring that laws and policies are set to allow them to gather an even greater percentage of the world's wealth to therefore insulate themselves further when the next inevitable crash comes.
How so? It would be far cheaper to administer than the current benefits system, everyone has a basic income. Those that work hard get to keep more and those who don't will presumably actually get a smaller income than they currently do on benefits. It also keeps things like the rental market etc in check.
I'm probably more right leaning in the centre and the more time goes on the more appealing I think universal basic income is.
I like the idea of a universal income as well but I can't see how the sums add up. What level would you set it at? I think the trouble is, to be enough of a safety net, it would be unaffordable. Even £5K a year per adult would be £225bn a year, which is twice as much as our current welfare budget. Not sure £100 a week would be enough for folks with disability issues or would cover hosing costs for many.
I'm not really understanding the universal basic income concept. In its pure form does every adult get given £5k over the year no matter their job, lack of job, application for job?
It's not enough to live on is it?
I thought the idea was that everyone got say £15k per year. It's enough for people to not have their noses at the grindstone. Loads of people make a success of their creative businesses and pay shit load more tax which continues to pay for the basic income to be paid in the future. It's a bit like a pension only while you are work.
My God you people are civilized even when disagreeing on the basic function of Government, do you understand how desperately my country needs conversations like these????
As for cutting benefits fraud, I'm certainly with that, but can you put forth an academic level study that quantifies how much we lost in benefits fraud? And by comparison, how much is lost in unclaimed benefits (for example, I could have claimed unemployment for the last month but didn't).
I'm going to go back to one of Limey's comments. When you talk about having hard work and ability ensuring you get out of poverty and minimum wage jobs, there just isn't data that shows that's the case in the last 30-40 years. Furthermore, when you look at the biggest employers in the country, what other jobs do you think people can get? One of the most observant things Obama has said was said behind closed doors at a 2008 fundraiser, something to the effect of "the jobs have been gone 30 years, and these people cling to their guns and their religion because they have nothing else."
I don't know the context, but it came across as accusatory, whereas I would have said "welcome to the presidency sir, do something about it." Farming and manufacturing jobs, jobs that were the backbone of our economy until (and this really depends regionally) the 70s/80s, are long gone. We all know unemployment numbers are nonsense because they don't account for the underemployed or the people who have just stopped working, either by choice (going on the benefits fraud theory, and there are certainly many out there), or because their skill set and ability is completely obsolete, and they're in their 40s or 50s and a decade or two short of retirement.
We've spent the better part of 25 years electing politicians for Government who do not inherently believe in Government. As a result we've gotten an increased deficit, expanded the size of the federal Government, and seemingly completely lost track of what a centralized Government should be for. Meanwhile, you have people who used to rely on publicly funded or endorsed projects (infrastructure, education, agriculture which still has ridiculous subsidies that goes back to the 30s despite the rise of agro-businesses) who no longer have that help. A Government's job should be to protect and improve its citizenry, a private entities job, by default, is to make a profit. In capitalism, that profit should be reinvested back into the economy, but since 2008 even that has been incredibly slow to happen. We've ended up with the worst of all worlds.
"I'm going to go back to one of Limey's comments. When you talk about having hard work and ability ensuring you get out of poverty and minimum wage jobs, there just isn't data that shows that's the case in the last 30-40 years. Furthermore, when you look at the biggest employers in the country, what other jobs do you think people can get? One of the most observant things Obama has said was said behind closed doors at a 2008 fundraiser, something to the effect of "the jobs have been gone 30 years, and these people cling to their guns and their religion because they have nothing else."
I don't need data for this, I've seen it in my own industry for decades. The young high school dropouts who come to the dealership to wash cars, and when showing initiative are trained as technicians, making six-figure incomes. Or the switchboard operator who is now the CEO of a chain of Maryland automobile dealerships. The waiter in a restaurant chain (a family member) who is now an area manager for a restaurant chain. Opportunities are there for those who want them. The country has a desperate shortage of truck drivers, they can make 60K a year, plus. This might interest you. http://profoundlydisconnected.com/usatodaywhatdoesagoodjoblooklike/
I agreed about the want it now, credit addicted culture that has grown prevalent, but Western capitalism requires it to exist. We need the economic version of perpetual motion, namely unending growth. The requires ever greater amounts of money to be created and spent, and that's what credit does. It allows banks to create money literally out of thin air. This ever increasing look if money leads to inflation, and then to increased wages and borrowing and the whole thing happily trundles on until explodes.
Each time there is a natural correction, I.e crash and recession, the top 1% are largely protected by their wealth and then set about ensuring that laws and policies are set to allow them to gather an even greater percentage of the world's wealth to therefore insulate themselves further when the next inevitable crash comes.
The banks will always be the winners in the current system because they are able to create money to lend. But growth isn't, and cannot be perpetual, hence the reason we have recessions. Inflation has become non existent in recent times when Central Banks have been more concerned with deflation. This is where self responsibility and sound financial management is so important and sadly so lacking, and has been replaced by greed at all levels. No one, Corporate or individual should be operating entirely on debt and everyone should be required to live within their means. That involves saving for a rainy day and building a war chest of at least 20% of one's total wealth to be able to call upon at short notice. How many companies or individuals do such a thing these days? The system is far from perfect, but the reason it now seems to be failing so badly is because of human greed and impatience that simply wasn't there 40/50 years ago.
I don't need data for this, I've seen it in my own industry for decades.
I can't argue with a study of one. I have no doubt that this happens, and good on them. I work with a lot of current or ex-Military folks. For so, so many, the Military is a fantastic social mobility tool. But it's one of the last.
I agreed about the want it now, credit addicted culture that has grown prevalent, but Western capitalism requires it to exist. We need the economic version of perpetual motion, namely unending growth. The requires ever greater amounts of money to be created and spent, and that's what credit does. It allows banks to create money literally out of thin air. This ever increasing look if money leads to inflation, and then to increased wages and borrowing and the whole thing happily trundles on until explodes.
Each time there is a natural correction, I.e crash and recession, the top 1% are largely protected by their wealth and then set about ensuring that laws and policies are set to allow them to gather an even greater percentage of the world's wealth to therefore insulate themselves further when the next inevitable crash comes.
The banks will always be the winners in the current system because they are able to create money to lend. But growth isn't, and cannot be perpetual, hence the reason we have recessions. Inflation has become non existent in recent times when Central Banks have been more concerned with deflation. This is where self responsibility and sound financial management is so important and sadly so lacking, and has been replaced by greed at all levels. No one, Corporate or individual should be operating entirely on debt and everyone should be required to live within their means. That involves saving for a rainy day and building a war chest of at least 20% of one's total wealth to be able to call upon at short notice. How many companies or individuals do such a thing these days? The system is far from perfect, but the reason it now seems to be failing so badly is because of human greed and impatience that simply wasn't there 40/50 years ago.
I agree... It's like the old story of the ant and the grasshopper so many people I know I up to their eyes in debt. But there certainly isn't a lot of encouragement to be frugal. Credit cards. Payday loans. Constant battering of advertising to buy the latest crap we don't need, and then throw it away and replace it when it inevitably stops working within a year or two. Personally I'm focussed on putting any free cash into my mortgage and getting debt free. I can draw on this capital if i really need it.
I agreed about the want it now, credit addicted culture that has grown prevalent, but Western capitalism requires it to exist. We need the economic version of perpetual motion, namely unending growth. The requires ever greater amounts of money to be created and spent, and that's what credit does. It allows banks to create money literally out of thin air. This ever increasing look if money leads to inflation, and then to increased wages and borrowing and the whole thing happily trundles on until explodes.
Each time there is a natural correction, I.e crash and recession, the top 1% are largely protected by their wealth and then set about ensuring that laws and policies are set to allow them to gather an even greater percentage of the world's wealth to therefore insulate themselves further when the next inevitable crash comes.
The banks will always be the winners in the current system because they are able to create money to lend. But growth isn't, and cannot be perpetual, hence the reason we have recessions. Inflation has become non existent in recent times when Central Banks have been more concerned with deflation. This is where self responsibility and sound financial management is so important and sadly so lacking, and has been replaced by greed at all levels. No one, Corporate or individual should be operating entirely on debt and everyone should be required to live within their means. That involves saving for a rainy day and building a war chest of at least 20% of one's total wealth to be able to call upon at short notice. How many companies or individuals do such a thing these days? The system is far from perfect, but the reason it now seems to be failing so badly is because of human greed and impatience that simply wasn't there 40/50 years ago.
I agree... It's like the old story of the ant and the grasshopper so many people I know I up to their eyes in debt. But there certainly isn't a lot of encouragement to be frugal. Credit cards. Payday loans. Constant battering of advertising to buy the latest crap we don't need, and then throw it away and replace it when it inevitably stops working within a year or two. Personally I'm focussed on putting any free cash into my mortgage and getting debt free. I can draw on this capital if i really need it.
That's the thing. Debt is like a cancer, if you don't get on top of it quickly, the effect of compounding interest means it will eventually kill you. Tony Abbott came into power here and immediately tried to introduce a tough first budget to address the debt issue (which he was given a very strong mandate to do) There followed absolute outcry from the leftist media which inevitably spread to the general public. One of the most contentious measures was the introduction of a co payment to see the Doctor of approx 2 pounds 50 (less than a cup of coffee) ! His popularity never recovered and the press then hounded him relentlessly. It has become increasingly evident that people nowadays generally are only interested in measures that will not impact them negatively, whilst totally ignoring the future implications for their children or the nation. It's like a patient wanting to get better, but refusing to take the medicine.
I have not read any of this thread because I cannot bear the thought that anyone on here who could, would even consider voting Trump. Just came on to mention that we met a couple of holidaying New Yorkers in a restaurant last night and they cannot abide the bloke or anything he stands for.
I have not read any of this thread because I cannot bear the thought that anyone on here who could, would even consider voting Trump. Just came on to mention that we met a couple of holidaying New Yorkers in a restaurant last night and they cannot abide the bloke or anything he stands for.
I agreed about the want it now, credit addicted culture that has grown prevalent, but Western capitalism requires it to exist. We need the economic version of perpetual motion, namely unending growth. The requires ever greater amounts of money to be created and spent, and that's what credit does. It allows banks to create money literally out of thin air. This ever increasing look if money leads to inflation, and then to increased wages and borrowing and the whole thing happily trundles on until explodes.
Each time there is a natural correction, I.e crash and recession, the top 1% are largely protected by their wealth and then set about ensuring that laws and policies are set to allow them to gather an even greater percentage of the world's wealth to therefore insulate themselves further when the next inevitable crash comes.
The banks will always be the winners in the current system because they are able to create money to lend. But growth isn't, and cannot be perpetual, hence the reason we have recessions. Inflation has become non existent in recent times when Central Banks have been more concerned with deflation. This is where self responsibility and sound financial management is so important and sadly so lacking, and has been replaced by greed at all levels. No one, Corporate or individual should be operating entirely on debt and everyone should be required to live within their means. That involves saving for a rainy day and building a war chest of at least 20% of one's total wealth to be able to call upon at short notice. How many companies or individuals do such a thing these days? The system is far from perfect, but the reason it now seems to be failing so badly is because of human greed and impatience that simply wasn't there 40/50 years ago.
I agree... It's like the old story of the ant and the grasshopper so many people I know I up to their eyes in debt. But there certainly isn't a lot of encouragement to be frugal. Credit cards. Payday loans. Constant battering of advertising to buy the latest crap we don't need, and then throw it away and replace it when it inevitably stops working within a year or two. Personally I'm focussed on putting any free cash into my mortgage and getting debt free. I can draw on this capital if i really need it.
That's the thing. Debt is like a cancer, if you don't get on top of it quickly, the effect of compounding interest means will eventually kill you. Tony Abbott came into power here and immediately tried to introduce a tough budget to address the debt issue (which he was given a very strong mandate to do) There followed absolute outcry from the leftist media which inevitably spread to the general public. One of the most contentious measures was the introduction of a co payment to see the Doctor of approx 2 pounds 50 (less than a cup of coffee) ! His popularity never recovered and the press then hounded him relentlessly. It has become increasingly evident that people nowadays generally are only interested in measures that will not impact them negatively, whilst totally ignoring the future implications for their children or the nation. It's like a patient wanting to get better, but refusing to take the medicine.
That's what I don't like... The short termism and doing something that will give you a short-lived advantage but have far reaching negative consequences. Not just for you but for everyone. Doing anything illegal obviously falls into this category. So does refusing to pay taxes that pay for education, health, police... Everyone benefits from these being properly funded, even if you are never ill, are no longer at school etc
I agreed about the want it now, credit addicted culture that has grown prevalent, but Western capitalism requires it to exist. We need the economic version of perpetual motion, namely unending growth. The requires ever greater amounts of money to be created and spent, and that's what credit does. It allows banks to create money literally out of thin air. This ever increasing look if money leads to inflation, and then to increased wages and borrowing and the whole thing happily trundles on until explodes.
Each time there is a natural correction, I.e crash and recession, the top 1% are largely protected by their wealth and then set about ensuring that laws and policies are set to allow them to gather an even greater percentage of the world's wealth to therefore insulate themselves further when the next inevitable crash comes.
The banks will always be the winners in the current system because they are able to create money to lend. But growth isn't, and cannot be perpetual, hence the reason we have recessions. Inflation has become non existent in recent times when Central Banks have been more concerned with deflation. This is where self responsibility and sound financial management is so important and sadly so lacking, and has been replaced by greed at all levels. No one, Corporate or individual should be operating entirely on debt and everyone should be required to live within their means. That involves saving for a rainy day and building a war chest of at least 20% of one's total wealth to be able to call upon at short notice. How many companies or individuals do such a thing these days? The system is far from perfect, but the reason it now seems to be failing so badly is because of human greed and impatience that simply wasn't there 40/50 years ago.
I agree... It's like the old story of the ant and the grasshopper so many people I know I up to their eyes in debt. But there certainly isn't a lot of encouragement to be frugal. Credit cards. Payday loans. Constant battering of advertising to buy the latest crap we don't need, and then throw it away and replace it when it inevitably stops working within a year or two. Personally I'm focussed on putting any free cash into my mortgage and getting debt free. I can draw on this capital if i really need it.
That's the thing. Debt is like a cancer, if you don't get on top of it quickly, the effect of compounding interest means it will eventually kill you. Tony Abbott came into power here and immediately tried to introduce a tough first budget to address the debt issue (which he was given a very strong mandate to do) There followed absolute outcry from the leftist media which inevitably spread to the general public. One of the most contentious measures was the introduction of a co payment to see the Doctor of approx 2 pounds 50 (less than a cup of coffee) ! His popularity never recovered and the press then hounded him relentlessly. It has become increasingly evident that people nowadays generally are only interested in measures that will not impact them negatively, whilst totally ignoring the future implications for their children or the nation. It's like a patient wanting to get better, but refusing to take the medicine.
What complete bollocks.
Tony Abbott came to power having nailed Julia Gillard on the, "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead" crap and made a big point of saying his government would do only what it said it would do and there would be, in his words, "no surprises."
He even went live on national TV - right before an election he was certain to win - and said, "I trust everyone has listened to what Joe Hockey has said, last week and again this week: there will be no cuts to education, no cuts to health, no change to pensions, no change to the GST, and, no cuts to the ABC or SBS."
So, what did the Mad Monk do in his very first budget? Massive cuts to education, health, pensions and the public broadcasters ABC and SBS - that's called lying and people really don't like that especially when you have told them you won't be lying to them.
Did Abbott talk about the GP Co-Payment before the election? Even mention it as a possibility? No, he didn't, because he knew people would not like it and it would cost him the election so he tried to sneak it through the Budget and he got utterly nailed for it.
Still, what else can you expect from a bloke who was getting women pregnant whilst studying to be a Priest and whose best mate is Cardinal George Pell - someone currently getting exposed for having deliberately protected Paedophile Priests whilst running the Catholic Church in Victoria.
Not forgetting, of course, that Abbott has previously provided character references for a Priest found guilty of Paedophile activities.
Even The Australian - owned by that well known leftie Rupert Murdoch - is now openly reporting what everybody in Canberra has known for years that the great "family man" Abbott was having an affair with his Chief of Staff Peta Credlin the whole time he was in office.
The man is an absolute moron and only the dumbest of the dumb are still defending him or his shambolic record.
If you want further proof of just how dumb he is then consider the fact that he refused to even take the calls of John Howard - you know, the most successful conservative in modern Australian history - after Howard told him to dump Credlin.
Of course, Tony hasn't taken his dumping very well at all and having promised "no white anting or destabilising" is now doing everything he can to make his own party lose the next election in an act of spite and revenge.
Tony Abbott came to power having nailed Julia Gillard on the, "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead" crap and made a big point of saying his government would do only what it said it would do and there would be, in his words, "no surprises."
He even went live on national TV - right before an election he was certain to win - and said, "I trust everyone has listened to what Joe Hockey has said, last week and again this week: there will be no cuts to education, no cuts to health, no change to pensions, no change to the GST, and, no cuts to the ABC or SBS."
So, what did the Mad Monk do in his very first budget? Massive cuts to education, health, pensions and the public broadcasters ABC and SBS - that's called lying and people really don't like that especially when you have told them you won't be lying to them.
Did Abbott talk about the GP Co-Payment before the election? Even mention it as a possibility? No, he didn't, because he knew people would not like it and it would cost him the election so he tried to sneak it through the Budget and he got utterly nailed for it.
Still, what else can you expect from a bloke who was getting women pregnant whilst studying to be a Priest and whose best mate is Cardinal George Pell - someone currently getting exposed for having deliberately protected Paedophile Priests whilst running the Catholic Church in Victoria.
Not forgetting, of course, that Abbott has previously provided character references for a Priest found guilty of Paedophile activities.
Even The Australian - owned by that well known leftie Rupert Murdoch - is now openly reporting what everybody in Canberra has known for years that the great "family man" Abbott was having an affair with his Chief of Staff Peta Credlin the whole time he was in office.
The man is an absolute moron and only the dumbest of the dumb are still defending him or his shambolic record.
If you want further proof of just how dumb he is then consider the fact that he refused to even take the calls of John Howard - you know, the most successful conservative in modern Australian history - after Howard told him to dump Credlin.
Of course, Tony hasn't taken his dumping very well at all and having promised "no white anting or destabilising" is now doing everything he can to make his own party lose the next election in an act of spite and revenge.
An utter, utter cunt of the highest order.
Queensland said:
You do love expletives, don't you! As for lies, how about that Gillard classic " there will be no carbon tax under a government I lead", you dismiss that one as just being "crap" why's that, because she's Labor? Yes Abbott said those things and he was stupid to do so, he should not have ruled them out. But the general pubic should also know the the debt issue cannot be addressed without any government making such cut backs in the absence of growth. They gave him a strong mandate to deal with the debt issue by voting him in in a landslide election win. Only Labor supporters believe that money grows on trees, or that debt will cure itself without any government intervention. Having an alleged affair is irrelevant to what he achieved. You do realise that Shorten has been investigated for historical rape and that Gillard, as well as participating in fraud, is also known to have had affairs with four married men, her old boss Peter Gordon, her colleague Craig Emmerson, CFMEU boss Michael O'Connor ( brother of Labor front bencher Brendan) and of course her old client at Slater & Gordon, Bruce Wilson whom she so ably and secretively assisted in setting up the sham AWU Work Place Reform Association, enabling the pair of them to live lavish lifestyles, buy another property and renovate her own property on the 300k + proceeds of the fraud, the equivalent of about 1.5 million now. The Royal Commission has recommended that both Wilson & his accomplice Ralph Blewitt be charged with fraud, Blewitt has admitted his guilt and wants, and is still waiting to be charged, but nothing has happened. Nothing will happen either, because they know that if the case ever got to court, Gillard would be implicated by the documentary evidence and by the testomy of Blewitt. What an embarrassment to have a former Prime Minister charged with fraud! But then when you hear a Royal Commissioner (Dyson Heydon) give her the benefit of doubt by saying "a person of the left is unlikely to participate in fraud" then you know the fix is well and truly in place. Gillard was sacked by Slater and Gordon when her role in assisting her boyfriend in committing this fraud was uncovered by her senior partners. An exit interview was conducted, recorded and transcribed and retained for 20 years, why was that then? She was not allowed to return to her office and never ever practised law again. Peter Gordon (her old boss) told Bob Kernohan, his mate and former Victorian President of the AWU, "I f****g sacked her". Bob Kernohan was determined to go to the Police about the AWU fraud, but was told by his protege, a young Bill Shorten "think of your future" Bob. Bob Kernohan was then beaten to within an inch of his life one night by three thugs and has never fully recovered and has suffered severe depression ever since, just for trying to expose the truth. The Victorian fraud squad raided the offices of Slater and Gordon whilst Gillard was a sitting Prime Minister and seized her travel records and her files related to the AWU scandal. None of the press or the ABC reported this at the time (more cover ups) Slater and Gordon tried their hardest (claiming Privilege) to ensure the seized documents couldn't be used by the Fraud Squad, but at court, Chief Magistrate Laurittson found that the documents had been created "in the furtherance of fraud". Had it not been for the return of the Andrews Labor Government in Victoria, Gillard would have been charged, as a fraud squad of around 15 people had been working on the case under Ken Ley for over two years. I've spent four years and read around 1300 documents on this issue and I am disgusted that such a person ever got to become Prime Minister of Australia. Yet you have the audacity to complain about Abbott. I can tell you one thing. During the coming election campaign Malcolm will be campaigning on Abbotts legacy, because Abbott achieved things, whilst Turdball has achieved nothing except bottling every hard decision that needs taking. What exactly has Malcolm done? He thought he'd attract the Gay/ Green vote but has pissed them off already by not passing Gay marriage, and he has lost the conservative vote who will be shifting to the new ALA instead, thus allowing Union crook (see above) and alleged rapist Shorten into the Lodge. Great job Malcolm! Go on, now give me another lol and say I'm talking utter bollocks, I'll wear it as a badge of honour. Oh and thanks for implying that I'm the "dumbest of the dumb". Personally I think that accolade should be reserved for remaining Gillard/Shorten supporters!
Tony Abbott came to power having nailed Julia Gillard on the, "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead" crap and made a big point of saying his government would do only what it said it would do and there would be, in his words, "no surprises."
He even went live on national TV - right before an election he was certain to win - and said, "I trust everyone has listened to what Joe Hockey has said, last week and again this week: there will be no cuts to education, no cuts to health, no change to pensions, no change to the GST, and, no cuts to the ABC or SBS."
So, what did the Mad Monk do in his very first budget? Massive cuts to education, health, pensions and the public broadcasters ABC and SBS - that's called lying and people really don't like that especially when you have told them you won't be lying to them.
Did Abbott talk about the GP Co-Payment before the election? Even mention it as a possibility? No, he didn't, because he knew people would not like it and it would cost him the election so he tried to sneak it through the Budget and he got utterly nailed for it.
Still, what else can you expect from a bloke who was getting women pregnant whilst studying to be a Priest and whose best mate is Cardinal George Pell - someone currently getting exposed for having deliberately protected Paedophile Priests whilst running the Catholic Church in Victoria.
Not forgetting, of course, that Abbott has previously provided character references for a Priest found guilty of Paedophile activities.
Even The Australian - owned by that well known leftie Rupert Murdoch - is now openly reporting what everybody in Canberra has known for years that the great "family man" Abbott was having an affair with his Chief of Staff Peta Credlin the whole time he was in office.
The man is an absolute moron and only the dumbest of the dumb are still defending him or his shambolic record.
If you want further proof of just how dumb he is then consider the fact that he refused to even take the calls of John Howard - you know, the most successful conservative in modern Australian history - after Howard told him to dump Credlin.
Of course, Tony hasn't taken his dumping very well at all and having promised "no white anting or destabilising" is now doing everything he can to make his own party lose the next election in an act of spite and revenge.
Massive cuts to the ABC? 4.6% over five years = tiny Massive cuts to SBS? 1.7% over five years = minuscule Changes to GST = None
As for your accusation that he knowingly helped a paedophile priest. The following is a quote from former priest and well known Lefty Journalist Paul Bongiorno who shared a presbytery with paedophile priest Gerald Risdale:
"I had no idea what he was up to,” he said. “And when people look at me quizzically, I say let me tell you this. “There are married men and women now who sleep with their husbands and wives and don’t know that their husband or wife is having an affair. “Let me tell you that Ridsdale never came to the presbytery in Warrnambool and said, ‘Guess how many boys I’ve raped today’. “They hide it. It was certainly hidden from me. And when it came out after I had left the priesthood, I was shocked and I was ashamed.”
The claim that he and Credlin had an affair, comes from bitter journalist Nicki Savva who's husband was once refused a job by Abbott. The claim was based on a perception, nothing more. The only actual evidence is that Credlin once fed him food from her fork and laid her head on his shoulder. But just like the punching a wall at uni incident and the eating of a raw onion, it will be blown out of all proportion by the rabid left, because he is a conservative catholic with traditional values and they hate him with a passion, even more than I hate the fraudster Gillard.
Good article that demonstrates the deep level of logical and moral thinking that informs every action that Obama takes. It is incredibly alarming to think of the quality and level of thinking that will inform the approach of a Trump presidency to these international issues.
I keep the same thing, "Trump is dangerous" "Trump is a bigger threat than ISIS" is the funniest one.
Can someone explain to me why exactly this is the case? Am I missing something? Should I commute to London each day wondering whether we're going to be hit from a terror attack by Trump? ISIS are the danger surely, and does he not have every intention of wiping them out no?
If someone could explain without referring to me as a right wing idiot that would be great, genuine question, if your answer convinces me to think otherwise then so be it.
I keep the same thing, "Trump is dangerous" "Trump is a bigger threat than ISIS" is the funniest one.
Can someone explain to me why exactly this is the case? Am I missing something? Should I commute to London each day wondering whether we're going to be hit from a terror attack by Trump? ISIS are the danger surely, and does he not have every intention of wiping them out no?
If someone could explain without referring to me as a right wing idiot that would be great, genuine question, if your answer convinces me to think otherwise then so be it.
The concern isn't that Trump would attack the UK.
My concern is that Trump would drag the UK and other countries into more wars. The man is self-obsessed, has a large ego, doesn't care what he says, and takes offence and overreacts to even the slightest insult (eg his tiny hands). He applies the opposite standards to other people from what he expects for himself.
If there ever were tensions between the US and another nation or between him and another world leader, so far Mr Trump has given no indication that he would even consider backing down to avoid conflict. And into that conflict goes thousands of British citizens.
I keep the same thing, "Trump is dangerous" "Trump is a bigger threat than ISIS" is the funniest one.
Can someone explain to me why exactly this is the case? Am I missing something? Should I commute to London each day wondering whether we're going to be hit from a terror attack by Trump? ISIS are the danger surely, and does he not have every intention of wiping them out no?
If someone could explain without referring to me as a right wing idiot that would be great, genuine question, if your answer convinces me to think otherwise then so be it.
International politics relies heavily on compromise, tolerance and above all diplomacy, diplomacy, diplomacy.
I could be wrong but I don't see Trump long suited on those requirements.
Comments
It is amazing how well the right wing media manage to attack the poor repeatedly and have the middle classes lap it up. They let the right steal 100s off them, whilst complaining the poor are taking pennies.
The cheapest root for society as a whole is to ensure a living wage. Walmart have no reason, beyond greed, to pay their staff below a living wage. If we are saying that western capitalism can allow you to work for one of the richest companies in the world, for 40 hours a week, and you not earn enough to live on, so that you require the government (and therefore every tax payer) to subsidise both your wages and therefore Walmart's profits, then capitalism has failed as a system.
Not everyone has the ability to improve themselves and get off that bottom rung, and our society will always have minimum wage jobs. We either need to ensure those on the minimum wages get benefits to allow them to live, or to ensure the minimum wage is enough to live on. If it's not then why would anybody chose to work 40 hours a week instead of working zero hours a week and live on benefits?
And that's the problem, too many don't want to pay the benefits, nor pay for a living wage, even though they'll likely pay less taxes because of it. So what are we left with? A disenchanted underclass who cannot earn enough to live on. That is why there is a benefits culture, because too many jobs now mean you are worse off working then earning benefits. The solution isn't to make it as difficult to live on benefits as it is to live on the minimum wages. It's to increase wages and lower taxation to the point where working is always the better option, and that an honest days work is enough to live on.
Each time there is a natural correction, I.e crash and recession, the top 1% are largely protected by their wealth and then set about ensuring that laws and policies are set to allow them to gather an even greater percentage of the world's wealth to therefore insulate themselves further when the next inevitable crash comes.
It's not enough to live on is it?
I thought the idea was that everyone got say £15k per year. It's enough for people to not have their noses at the grindstone. Loads of people make a success of their creative businesses and pay shit load more tax which continues to pay for the basic income to be paid in the future. It's a bit like a pension only while you are work.
Not fantastic for immigration figures.
Might cause some drug related social issues.
As for cutting benefits fraud, I'm certainly with that, but can you put forth an academic level study that quantifies how much we lost in benefits fraud? And by comparison, how much is lost in unclaimed benefits (for example, I could have claimed unemployment for the last month but didn't).
I'm going to go back to one of Limey's comments. When you talk about having hard work and ability ensuring you get out of poverty and minimum wage jobs, there just isn't data that shows that's the case in the last 30-40 years. Furthermore, when you look at the biggest employers in the country, what other jobs do you think people can get? One of the most observant things Obama has said was said behind closed doors at a 2008 fundraiser, something to the effect of "the jobs have been gone 30 years, and these people cling to their guns and their religion because they have nothing else."
I don't know the context, but it came across as accusatory, whereas I would have said "welcome to the presidency sir, do something about it." Farming and manufacturing jobs, jobs that were the backbone of our economy until (and this really depends regionally) the 70s/80s, are long gone. We all know unemployment numbers are nonsense because they don't account for the underemployed or the people who have just stopped working, either by choice (going on the benefits fraud theory, and there are certainly many out there), or because their skill set and ability is completely obsolete, and they're in their 40s or 50s and a decade or two short of retirement.
We've spent the better part of 25 years electing politicians for Government who do not inherently believe in Government. As a result we've gotten an increased deficit, expanded the size of the federal Government, and seemingly completely lost track of what a centralized Government should be for. Meanwhile, you have people who used to rely on publicly funded or endorsed projects (infrastructure, education, agriculture which still has ridiculous subsidies that goes back to the 30s despite the rise of agro-businesses) who no longer have that help. A Government's job should be to protect and improve its citizenry, a private entities job, by default, is to make a profit. In capitalism, that profit should be reinvested back into the economy, but since 2008 even that has been incredibly slow to happen. We've ended up with the worst of all worlds.
I don't need data for this, I've seen it in my own industry for decades. The young high school dropouts who come to the dealership to wash cars, and when showing initiative are trained as technicians, making six-figure incomes. Or the switchboard operator who is now the CEO of a chain of Maryland automobile dealerships. The waiter in a restaurant chain (a family member) who is now an area manager for a restaurant chain. Opportunities are there for those who want them. The country has a desperate shortage of truck drivers, they can make 60K a year, plus.
This might interest you.
http://profoundlydisconnected.com/usatodaywhatdoesagoodjoblooklike/
Tony Abbott came into power here and immediately tried to introduce a tough first budget to address the debt issue (which he was given a very strong mandate to do) There followed absolute outcry from the leftist media which inevitably spread to the general public. One of the most contentious measures was the introduction of a co payment to see the Doctor of approx 2 pounds 50 (less than a cup of coffee) ! His popularity never recovered and the press then hounded him relentlessly.
It has become increasingly evident that people nowadays generally are only interested in measures that will not impact them negatively, whilst totally ignoring the future implications for their children or the nation. It's like a patient wanting to get better, but refusing to take the medicine.
(Dives for cover)
Tony Abbott came to power having nailed Julia Gillard on the, "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead" crap and made a big point of saying his government would do only what it said it would do and there would be, in his words, "no surprises."
He even went live on national TV - right before an election he was certain to win - and said, "I trust everyone has listened to what Joe Hockey has said, last week and again this week: there will be no cuts to education, no cuts to health, no change to pensions, no change to the GST, and, no cuts to the ABC or SBS."
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/tony-abbott-dogged-by-interview-with-sbs-anton-enus-about-abc-cuts-on-eve-of-election-20141120-11qc97.html
So, what did the Mad Monk do in his very first budget? Massive cuts to education, health, pensions and the public broadcasters ABC and SBS - that's called lying and people really don't like that especially when you have told them you won't be lying to them.
Did Abbott talk about the GP Co-Payment before the election? Even mention it as a possibility? No, he didn't, because he knew people would not like it and it would cost him the election so he tried to sneak it through the Budget and he got utterly nailed for it.
Still, what else can you expect from a bloke who was getting women pregnant whilst studying to be a Priest and whose best mate is Cardinal George Pell - someone currently getting exposed for having deliberately protected Paedophile Priests whilst running the Catholic Church in Victoria.
Not forgetting, of course, that Abbott has previously provided character references for a Priest found guilty of Paedophile activities.
Even The Australian - owned by that well known leftie Rupert Murdoch - is now openly reporting what everybody in Canberra has known for years that the great "family man" Abbott was having an affair with his Chief of Staff Peta Credlin the whole time he was in office.
The man is an absolute moron and only the dumbest of the dumb are still defending him or his shambolic record.
If you want further proof of just how dumb he is then consider the fact that he refused to even take the calls of John Howard - you know, the most successful conservative in modern Australian history - after Howard told him to dump Credlin.
Of course, Tony hasn't taken his dumping very well at all and having promised "no white anting or destabilising" is now doing everything he can to make his own party lose the next election in an act of spite and revenge.
An utter, utter cunt of the highest order.
What complete bollocks.
Tony Abbott came to power having nailed Julia Gillard on the, "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead" crap and made a big point of saying his government would do only what it said it would do and there would be, in his words, "no surprises."
He even went live on national TV - right before an election he was certain to win - and said, "I trust everyone has listened to what Joe Hockey has said, last week and again this week: there will be no cuts to education, no cuts to health, no change to pensions, no change to the GST, and, no cuts to the ABC or SBS."
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/tony-abbott-dogged-by-interview-with-sbs-anton-enus-about-abc-cuts-on-eve-of-election-20141120-11qc97.html
So, what did the Mad Monk do in his very first budget? Massive cuts to education, health, pensions and the public broadcasters ABC and SBS - that's called lying and people really don't like that especially when you have told them you won't be lying to them.
Did Abbott talk about the GP Co-Payment before the election? Even mention it as a possibility? No, he didn't, because he knew people would not like it and it would cost him the election so he tried to sneak it through the Budget and he got utterly nailed for it.
Still, what else can you expect from a bloke who was getting women pregnant whilst studying to be a Priest and whose best mate is Cardinal George Pell - someone currently getting exposed for having deliberately protected Paedophile Priests whilst running the Catholic Church in Victoria.
Not forgetting, of course, that Abbott has previously provided character references for a Priest found guilty of Paedophile activities.
Even The Australian - owned by that well known leftie Rupert Murdoch - is now openly reporting what everybody in Canberra has known for years that the great "family man" Abbott was having an affair with his Chief of Staff Peta Credlin the whole time he was in office.
The man is an absolute moron and only the dumbest of the dumb are still defending him or his shambolic record.
If you want further proof of just how dumb he is then consider the fact that he refused to even take the calls of John Howard - you know, the most successful conservative in modern Australian history - after Howard told him to dump Credlin.
Of course, Tony hasn't taken his dumping very well at all and having promised "no white anting or destabilising" is now doing everything he can to make his own party lose the next election in an act of spite and revenge.
An utter, utter cunt of the highest order.
Queensland said:
You do love expletives, don't you! As for lies, how about that Gillard classic " there will be no carbon tax under a government I lead", you dismiss that one as just being "crap" why's that, because she's Labor?
Yes Abbott said those things and he was stupid to do so, he should not have ruled them out. But the general pubic should also know the the debt issue cannot be addressed without any government making such cut backs in the absence of growth. They gave him a strong mandate to deal with the debt issue by voting him in in a landslide election win. Only Labor supporters believe that money grows on trees, or that debt will cure itself without any government intervention.
Having an alleged affair is irrelevant to what he achieved. You do realise that Shorten has been investigated for historical rape and that Gillard, as well as participating in fraud, is also known to have had affairs with four married men, her old boss Peter Gordon, her colleague Craig Emmerson, CFMEU boss Michael O'Connor ( brother of Labor front bencher Brendan) and of course her old client at Slater & Gordon, Bruce Wilson whom she so ably and secretively assisted in setting up the sham AWU Work Place Reform Association, enabling the pair of them to live lavish lifestyles, buy another property and renovate her own property on the 300k + proceeds of the fraud, the equivalent of about 1.5 million now. The Royal Commission has recommended that both Wilson & his accomplice Ralph Blewitt be charged with fraud, Blewitt has admitted his guilt and wants, and is still waiting to be charged, but nothing has happened. Nothing will happen either, because they know that if the case ever got to court, Gillard would be implicated by the documentary evidence and by the testomy of Blewitt. What an embarrassment to have a former Prime Minister charged with fraud!
But then when you hear a Royal Commissioner (Dyson Heydon) give her the benefit of doubt by saying "a person of the left is unlikely to participate in fraud" then you know the fix is well and truly in place.
Gillard was sacked by Slater and Gordon when her role in assisting her boyfriend in committing this fraud was uncovered by her senior partners. An exit interview was conducted, recorded and transcribed and retained for 20 years, why was that then? She was not allowed to return to her office and never ever practised law again.
Peter Gordon (her old boss) told Bob Kernohan, his mate and former Victorian President of the AWU, "I f****g sacked her". Bob Kernohan was determined to go to the Police about the AWU fraud, but was told by his protege, a young Bill Shorten "think of your future" Bob.
Bob Kernohan was then beaten to within an inch of his life one night by three thugs and has never fully recovered and has suffered severe depression ever since, just for trying to expose the truth.
The Victorian fraud squad raided the offices of Slater and Gordon whilst Gillard was a sitting Prime Minister and seized her travel records and her files related to the AWU scandal. None of the press or the ABC reported this at the time (more cover ups)
Slater and Gordon tried their hardest (claiming Privilege) to ensure the seized documents couldn't be used by the Fraud Squad, but at court, Chief Magistrate Laurittson found that the documents had been created "in the furtherance of fraud".
Had it not been for the return of the Andrews Labor Government in Victoria, Gillard would have been charged, as a fraud squad of around 15 people had been working on the case under Ken Ley for over two years.
I've spent four years and read around 1300 documents on this issue and I am disgusted that such a person ever got to become Prime Minister of Australia.
Yet you have the audacity to complain about Abbott.
I can tell you one thing. During the coming election campaign Malcolm will be campaigning on Abbotts legacy, because Abbott achieved things, whilst Turdball has achieved nothing except bottling every hard decision that needs taking. What exactly has Malcolm done? He thought he'd attract the Gay/ Green vote but has pissed them off already by not passing Gay marriage, and he has lost the conservative vote who will be shifting to the new ALA instead, thus allowing Union crook (see above) and alleged rapist Shorten into the Lodge. Great job Malcolm!
Go on, now give me another lol and say I'm talking utter bollocks, I'll wear it as a badge of honour.
Oh and thanks for implying that I'm the "dumbest of the dumb". Personally I think that accolade should be reserved for remaining Gillard/Shorten supporters!
Ormiston said:
What complete bollocks.
Tony Abbott came to power having nailed Julia Gillard on the, "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead" crap and made a big point of saying his government would do only what it said it would do and there would be, in his words, "no surprises."
He even went live on national TV - right before an election he was certain to win - and said, "I trust everyone has listened to what Joe Hockey has said, last week and again this week: there will be no cuts to education, no cuts to health, no change to pensions, no change to the GST, and, no cuts to the ABC or SBS."
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/tony-abbott-dogged-by-interview-with-sbs-anton-enus-about-abc-cuts-on-eve-of-election-20141120-11qc97.html
So, what did the Mad Monk do in his very first budget? Massive cuts to education, health, pensions and the public broadcasters ABC and SBS - that's called lying and people really don't like that especially when you have told them you won't be lying to them.
Did Abbott talk about the GP Co-Payment before the election? Even mention it as a possibility? No, he didn't, because he knew people would not like it and it would cost him the election so he tried to sneak it through the Budget and he got utterly nailed for it.
Still, what else can you expect from a bloke who was getting women pregnant whilst studying to be a Priest and whose best mate is Cardinal George Pell - someone currently getting exposed for having deliberately protected Paedophile Priests whilst running the Catholic Church in Victoria.
Not forgetting, of course, that Abbott has previously provided character references for a Priest found guilty of Paedophile activities.
Even The Australian - owned by that well known leftie Rupert Murdoch - is now openly reporting what everybody in Canberra has known for years that the great "family man" Abbott was having an affair with his Chief of Staff Peta Credlin the whole time he was in office.
The man is an absolute moron and only the dumbest of the dumb are still defending him or his shambolic record.
If you want further proof of just how dumb he is then consider the fact that he refused to even take the calls of John Howard - you know, the most successful conservative in modern Australian history - after Howard told him to dump Credlin.
Of course, Tony hasn't taken his dumping very well at all and having promised "no white anting or destabilising" is now doing everything he can to make his own party lose the next election in an act of spite and revenge.
An utter, utter cunt of the highest order.
Queensland Addick said:
Massive cuts to education? Labor lies
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-02/kate-ellis-using-rubbery-school-funding-figures/5543330
Massive cuts to health? Labor conjecture
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-06-23/has-hospital-funding-been-cut-by-50-billion-fact-check/5486988
Massive cuts to the ABC? 4.6% over five years = tiny
Massive cuts to SBS? 1.7% over five years = minuscule
Changes to GST = None
As for your accusation that he knowingly helped a paedophile priest. The following is a quote from former priest and well known Lefty Journalist Paul Bongiorno who shared a presbytery with paedophile priest Gerald Risdale:
"I had no idea what he was up to,” he said. “And when people look at me quizzically, I say let me tell you this.
“There are married men and women now who sleep with their husbands and wives and don’t know that their husband or wife is having an affair.
“Let me tell you that Ridsdale never came to the presbytery in Warrnambool and said, ‘Guess how many boys I’ve raped today’.
“They hide it. It was certainly hidden from me. And when it came out after I had left the priesthood, I was shocked and I was ashamed.”
The claim that he and Credlin had an affair, comes from bitter journalist Nicki Savva who's husband was once refused a job by Abbott. The claim was based on a perception, nothing more. The only actual evidence is that Credlin once fed him food from her fork and laid her head on his shoulder.
But just like the punching a wall at uni incident and the eating of a raw onion, it will be blown out of all proportion by the rabid left, because he is a conservative catholic with traditional values and they hate him with a passion, even more than I hate the fraudster Gillard.
nytimes.com/2016/03/10/world/middleeast/obama-criticizes-the-free-riders-among-americas-allies.html?smid=nytcore-ipad-share&smprod=nytcore-ipad
Can someone explain to me why exactly this is the case? Am I missing something? Should I commute to London each day wondering whether we're going to be hit from a terror attack by Trump? ISIS are the danger surely, and does he not have every intention of wiping them out no?
If someone could explain without referring to me as a right wing idiot that would be great, genuine question, if your answer convinces me to think otherwise then so be it.
My concern is that Trump would drag the UK and other countries into more wars. The man is self-obsessed, has a large ego, doesn't care what he says, and takes offence and overreacts to even the slightest insult (eg his tiny hands). He applies the opposite standards to other people from what he expects for himself.
If there ever were tensions between the US and another nation or between him and another world leader, so far Mr Trump has given no indication that he would even consider backing down to avoid conflict. And into that conflict goes thousands of British citizens.
That's my starter.
I could be wrong but I don't see Trump long suited on those requirements.