Federal Coalition Government 2013-?
- Thread starter boyo
- Start date
- Status
It is amazing how many differing reports there are on this, it was my understanding that the issue is medium to long term and structural in nature. Simply put as our population ages, more medical support will be needed for longer at greater and greater expense.
So just because this year wasn't particularly bad, it doesn't mean that the issue isn't there.
Sort of like the climate skeptics jumping on every contrary data point to highlight the whole thing is bullocks.
I remember one of the few prescient things Bob Carr said whilst NSW premier.
paraphrasing "I could spend the whole NSW budget on health and still not satisfy everyone"
There is an issue on how to spread out a limited budget, to suggest otherwise is not realistic.
Well, that is what political parties do.
In the end it is reports at 20 paces, with each putting up their position while refuting the opposing point of view.
The chicken-little presumption of everything the coalition says is just as wrong as saying the economy is in a happy place is wrong as well.
The challenge is that worst case marketing is the easiest way to drive the want for change, they all do it, just look at the global warming reports as a good, "non coalition" version of the chicken little approach. No one ever publishes the smaller side of the range when reporting the end of the world.
boyo
Mark Ella (57)
agreed
boyo
Mark Ella (57)
Another "Quick, look over there" moment by TA to distract punters from his shortcomings.
He wants to have a "mature debate". A "mature debate" involving TA is an oxymoron.
Pardon, Mr Abbott, your hypocrisy is showing
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...our-hypocrisy-is-showing-20141027-11ckhv.html
He wants to have a "mature debate". A "mature debate" involving TA is an oxymoron.
Pardon, Mr Abbott, your hypocrisy is showing
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...our-hypocrisy-is-showing-20141027-11ckhv.html
Ruggo
Mark Ella (57)
We should have the discussion. Doesn't mean we have to raise it but we should be mature enough to have the discussion and have it over the broader community.
I do love the fuel excise thing. What a storm in a tea cup. When Howard was on the hunt for pork, he didn't do Abbott any favors taking away the indexising. In Darwin, we have only just had our fuel come into line with Southern capital cities, down from a $1.73 so I could not give a rats about half a cent.
Gnostic
Mark Ella (57)
I actually don't have a problem with the Coalition stance of the Ebola situation. Think of this as a test run for the next big Flu outbreak, Malaria, TB, or any number of other pathogens that might arise with a rapidly changing climate and environment and population increase.
Ebola itself is not the second coming of the "plague" but right questions have not really be publicly asked. To me it is a "canary in the coal mine" type disease. We have now seen 100 x the fatalities in this outbreak as in all other instances. That is directly attributable to not only mutation in the pathogen but also the changes outlined above.
Ebola itself is not the second coming of the "plague" but right questions have not really be publicly asked. To me it is a "canary in the coal mine" type disease. We have now seen 100 x the fatalities in this outbreak as in all other instances. That is directly attributable to not only mutation in the pathogen but also the changes outlined above.
yep, and the opposition is using Howard's argument about any change being bad for families as well
Ruggo
Mark Ella (57)
That's just cheap politics. I would rather see the opposition apply heat on the education issue. That is where the government must truly be held to account on domestic issues. I would rather see the opposition probe this national security furfy rather than follow blindly. Sure their was a threat but the government has blown the issue way out of proportion for political means and nobody has called them out for it. I want the government held to account over it's dismal ebola response.
And one last thing on the fuel issue. I don't want no shitty diesel rebates attached to it. Miners don't need a leg up out of the tax payers wallet and the ACCC should be able to sniff out excess freight costs being exploited.
And one last thing on the fuel issue. I don't want no shitty diesel rebates attached to it. Miners don't need a leg up out of the tax payers wallet and the ACCC should be able to sniff out excess freight costs being exploited.
the diesel rebate I understand is historical, when the fuel excise was first introduced it was to improve roads, the miners said wtf we don't use your roads and had enough clout to get the exemption
the government of the time should have said the fuel excise was to collect revenue like it really was
Ruggo
Mark Ella (57)
I don't like when any tax is sold to fund this or that. Simple fact is it all goes into consolidated revenue.
Times have changed in a big way. Miners use our roads frequently. They don't all have direct rail access to the terminal like in the Pilbra.
The vehicles used are significantly bigger in some areas with road train combinations exceeding 50m in length.
Times have changed in a big way. Miners use our roads frequently. They don't all have direct rail access to the terminal like in the Pilbra.
The vehicles used are significantly bigger in some areas with road train combinations exceeding 50m in length.
- Status