Meanwhile, over breakfast in the News Nips household

Me: Pah! The people did vote. Just because you don’t like the outcome doesn’t mean we should have another election. We had to put up with Howard for ten years.
ManFriend: Yeah, suck it up, princesses.

Convoy of No Confidence

Indignant dude in the Convoy of No Confidence. Picture: Stefan Postles/SMH

Signs like this one crack me up. We did vote. And we’re not going to do it again just because you don’t like the winner.

Years ago, an ant bit me on the bum while I was in bed. ManFriend laughed so hard and said the look of indignation on my face was fantastic. That’s what this “Convoy of No Confidence” stuff is like. Being bitten on the bum by an ant. You’ll get over it, but it feels better if you throw a little tanty.

Yes, they should rally. If they want to spend their money to protest over having to spend a little more money to make our environment cleaner, then go for it. (Although I have to laugh at Nick and Fluff Weckert who spent $3000 on fuel driving from Port Lincoln to Canberra to protest over the rising cost of living.)

If they want to demand a new election, then go for that too. But it doesn’t mean we should have one. Particularly when the 2010 election cost us $161 million. And particularly when their argument is “the politician is a liar so let’s have another election”. If we had to have another election every time a politician said one thing and then said another – or broke a core or non-core promise and thankyouverymuch John Howard for that slimy contribution to political discourse – then we’d be at the polls every fucking weekend. It would bankrupt us.

Sure, Labor went to the last election saying there’d be no action on climate change, which is why I didn’t vote for them. But minority governments change the game. It’s called compromise. You know, that thing you arrive at after negotiating with the people you have to form government with. The people who were voted in by lots of other people. Deal with it. Besides, it’s no different to the “never ever” GST. Many politicians will say anything to get into power and I can’t believe people are whining “oh, but they liiiiiiieeeeedddddd”. I don’t recall any pro-Abbott fans protesting over his constant changes of mind. His political opportunism is embarrassing and makes me think his supporters must be stupid. Or selfish. Probably both.

But I do have to laugh at the sign above: “Let’s take our country back”. That’s exactly how I felt in the lead up to the 2007 election when it became clear that we’d finally be able to take our country back from the Coalition and their mean-spirited policies.

112 responses to “Meanwhile, over breakfast in the News Nips household

  1. You are awesome. That is all. I agree with every word. Anty ant ant!

  2. “Many politicians will say anything to get into power and I can’t believe people are whining “oh, but they liiiiiiieeeeedddddd”. I don’t recall any pro-Abbott fans protesting over his constant changes of mind. His political opportunism is embarrassing and makes me think his supporters must be stupid. Or selfish. Probably both.”

    This!! Every time I hear “Juliar lied, lied!” all I can think about is what a lying, self-interested douche Tony Abbott is. FFS – the man has been nicknamed weathervane – and yet, he is meant to be a more appropriate candidate in this context?
    Oh – and the minority guvmt thing – what is it that people do not get?

  3. “That’s exactly how I felt in the lead up to the 2007 election when it became clear that we’d finally be able to take our country back from the Coalition and their mean-spirited policies.”

    That line makes me sad because I look at where we are now after feeling so much potential and optimism at the time.

  4. Kim
    The reason that so many people are calling for another election, besides the fact that Gillard lied about the carbon tax is quite simply because hers has been the most incompetent government in living memory. The litany of failure in the execution of so many elements of Labor policy is just too long to list here.
    Had Gillard been a better negotiator with the Greens and independents (like not caving in on the Carbon tax or Wilkie’s Pokies nonsense) she would have more respect from the people. Sadly despite all of her reputation as a negotiator she cut an awful deal that required her to do a massive backflip with pike on the carbon tax when a bit of hard-headedness could have seen her say to Bob Brown “yeah I’ll support your carbon tax idea,at the next election because I can’t govern at the cost of may integrity, and are you trying to tell me that you would rather have Tony in the lodge?
    Add to the repeated announcements of things that are not finalised (Timor solution, or Malaysian anyone?) and are your really surprised that the people want a do over?
    Anyway it looks more likely than not that Craig Thomson’s time in the HSU may yet do to Julia what she has been doing to the country

    • The most incompetent, really? The BER was a success. The fire risk was worse before the home insulation program. Where is the litany of failure?

      You also fail to understand what negotiate means. I bet you’re one of those people who say “so and so should meet me half way” but by half way you mean agree with you. That is not negotiating. That is bullying.

  5. No Kim I do understand how to negotiate but I just think that Gillard was clearly out done by the Greens who knew just how desperate she was to get into the lodge.
    The BER has certainly produced lots of shiney buildings in schools but the question about its success has a great deal more to do with the value for money in that infrastructure rather than its ability to enrich a fairly small clique of builders. As for the insulation program try telling the families of the four workers who lost their lives or to the people who still have electrical death traps in their ceiling spaces as the result of a poorly designed and administered scheme. Then there are schemes like the “cash for clunkers” the promised “peoples assembly” and so many other bad ideas rushed out to try to make the government look good that just crashed and burned in the light of reality.
    Negotiating is not just about splitting the difference its about making a deal that you can actaully live with Gillard agreed to not only support the carbon tax to get into the lodge but also to sell it to the public, and hasn’t that worked well for her?

    • So just because the Greens got one thing they wanted, Gillard was “clearly out done”?

      And your point about the families who lost someone is fatuous – what about all those families who lost someone before the insulation scheme?

      All governments have bad ideas. The Howard Govt had a massive one: WorkChoices.

      As for selling the carbon tax, you actually believe that 200 people is a serious threat to any government? The same number of people were at the Don’t Be Taken For A Ride rally: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/business/cyclists-take-on-the-truck-convoys/2266125.aspx

      • Workchoices and being able to ‘negotiate away’ scheduled meal and other breaks, would have meant many, many more industrial injuries and deaths – it is absolutely immoral to manipulate people into trading away minimum safety standards. I have not seen EITHER major party getting upset about the many, many industrial injuries and deaths that still happen every year, unless they can make political mileage from them, which is mind-blowingly cynical.
        As for the BER – it has a 97% satisfaction rate. An EBAY seller with that sort of rating would be someone that most buyers would trust. I cannot believe that anyone can look at one of the most stable economies in the Western world and complain about incompetence. Utterly absurd.

        • I know. The amount of “what about me” whining that goes on in this country is revolting.

        • I defy you to prove that not eating lunch will kill you. Inever eat lunch and here I am typing away. As for the BER satisfaction rate of course there was satisfaction from school principals, for a start they are highly unionised (ie Labor hacks) and secondly they got something for free. The question isn’t about how pretty the buildings were but value for money of which in the state school system in NSW especially there was none.

          • Working for long hours without breaks will cause less co-ordination and less sensible actions and reactions. It’s got very little to do with sitting on a computer not having eaten lunch. I know from almost-personal experience how many more stuff-ups one makes when one is tired and/or sleep deprived and is using power tools or heavy machinery. Industrial accidents do happen, as do medical negligence and a host of other things, when people do not get effective breaks.

        • Utterly absurd

          You’ve summed up Inane Hall in one short phrase.
          Don’t bite back to his ridiculous trolling attempts…he takes getting pwned as encouragement. Naturally he gets gets pwned A LOT.

  6. You want an example of a massive government failure which has poured umpty millions into the pockets of dodgy operators who disappeared, and which then the government had to quietly buy back so many contracts and give them to marginally more reputable operators, a scheme which is infinitely worse, more complicated, more expensive, less useful, less helpful…Job Network Members.
    Definitely one of the most incompetent Government programmes EVER and purely ideologically-based – why let a government department do something when a private operator can get a payment for sending blackmailing letters to job-seekers to get them to walk through their door and be handed a local paper?

  7. Kim
    when I say that Gillard was “clearly out done” was that it seems that she paid too high a price for the poisoned chalice of minority government.
    My point about the death of those four insulation installers is simply that had teh scheme not been created in such haste and without any substantive rules, regulation, or oversight of just who would do the work that makes the death of those workers the very obvious fault of Labor.
    As it happens I agree with you that Workchoices was a bad idea and I said so repeatedly at my own blog when it was the issue de Jour in 2006/7
    As for cyclists, most of whom are latte sippers (or worse still Greens Voters 😉 ) they are seen as fringe dwellers, you need to show that the ordinary mums and dad support this silly policy but all of the polling shows that they don’t and that is what will ultimately matter here.
    Gillard is gone politically and the longer she stays in office the longer that Labor and the left will be enjoying the wilderness and the fact that they won’t be back in government for quite a few terms.

    • Iain, out of polite curiousity, would your preferred option be Tony Abbott as PM?

      • As it stands I would prefer Tony Abbott as PM but even more so if he were to go quickly to a new election to get a decent majority. I don’t rate minority government , for either side as a good thing.

        • And I’m yet to see anyone at one of these rabid anti-carbon tax rallies who isn’t a fringe dweller.

          As for fringe dwellers on bikes in Canberra – most people ride bikes in Canberra.

        • Hey Iain,

          You’re either deluded (or simply lying) about for your reasons for preferring Abbott as PM or you are simply not bright enough to see the facts right in front of your face.

          If you want an effective negotiator as you claim you do then you can’t vote for Abbott, not only did he lose the negotiations with the Independents and the Greens but didn’t get anything he wanted from their either. Gillard may have had to compromise a bit but she beat Tony at least.

          If this really is a priority for you then you should be looking at the people who did really well from those negotiations, to put it simply you should be voting Greens or Independent. Those guys made off like bandits!

          You want to talk about do nothing government? Look at the opposition, they have gotten NOTHING they want done so far and can’t even get a seat at the table when policies are getting made. Abbott has been so blatantly adversarial in his tactics that the sitting government want nothing to do with him or his agenda. This isn’t the role of the opposition and if he was willing to take that role more seriously Abbott would be able to get an awful lot more of his agenda done.

          Again, who has gotten most of their agenda done without holding government? Why that would be the Greens.

          Stop kidding us around Iain, you’d rather Abbott as PM because you voted for him and right now you are just having a little hissy fit pretending it’s rational discourse and reasoned argument. It’s all because you lost the election and I suppose that just demonstrates what sort of role model Abbott really is.

          Believe me I have no love of Labor (check my blog if you like) and if those are really your reasons for disliking Labor or Gillard then you really don’t know what you are talking about.

          • David

            You’re either deluded (or simply lying) about for your reasons for preferring Abbott as PM or you are simply not bright enough to see the facts right in front of your face.

            the reasons that I offered here for supporting the coalition are many and varied and my response herewas by no means exhaustive, check out may blog for more 😉

            If you want an effective negotiator as you claim you do then you can’t vote for Abbott, not only did he lose the negotiations with the Independents and the Greens but didn’t get anything he wanted from their either. Gillard may have had to compromise a bit but she beat Tony at least.

            An effective negotiator understands that if you can’t get agreement on terms that you can actaully live with then you walk away, Tony was clearly willing to go quite far to get into office, but, and thsi is the big difference between him and Gillard, he was clearly not willing to pay any price for office as Gillard did.

            If this really is a priority for you then you should be looking at the people who did really well from those negotiations, to put it simply you should be voting Greens or Independent. Those guys made off like bandits!

            Winning a pigs ear when you want a silk purse is simply not a good result and certainly not something worth selling you political soul for, Gillard made a deal with the devil and now she is paying the price, Tony being a man well versed in his faith understands that such bargains are never what they seem and he has earned kudosfor not taking hold of the poisoned chalice.

            You want to talk about do nothing government? Look at the opposition, they have gotten NOTHING they want done so far and can’t even get a seat at the table when policies are getting made. Abbott has been so blatantly adversarial in his tactics that the sitting government want nothing to do with him or his agenda.

            The colaition do not hold the treasury benches, so they are working hard to take them and when they do then you can legitimately critique what they may do in government and frankly I don’t get why you expect that they should just meekly acquiesce to the wishes of the current government, You seem to be exhibiting a profound misunderstanding of just how parliamentary democracy actaully works and the respective roles of its players.

            This isn’t the role of the opposition and if he was willing to take that role more seriously Abbott would be able to get an awful lot more of his agenda done.

            The role of an opposition is to highlight the errors and misjudgements of the government,sadly for the country this current regime gives the opposition lots to work with.

            Again, who has gotten most of their agenda done without holding government? Why that would be the Greens.

            Yes and that is the problem isn’t it? The minority Greens tail has been vigorously wagging the ALP dog and now the people are calling for a vet to put down that poor palsied hound before his shaking infects us all.

            Stop kidding us around Iain, you’d rather Abbott as PM because you voted for him and right now you are just having a little hissy fit pretending it’s rational discourse and reasoned argument. It’s all because you lost the election and I suppose that just demonstrates what sort of role model Abbott really is.

            I am not the one having any kind of hissy fit. Here that affliction seems to be confined to you poor minions of the left who can see left leaning government that is in self-destruct mode and you really don’t know how to defend its indefensible stuff ups (apart from empty denial of the problems)or how to come to terms with its clearly terminal decline .

            Believe me I have no love of Labor (check my blog if you like) and if those are really your reasons for disliking Labor or Gillard then you really don’t know what you are talking about.

            I will check out your blog and I hope that you take up may invitation to visit may place because I love a good argumentand I would love to show you just how wrong you are. 😉

            • “An effective negotiator understands that if you can’t get agreement on terms that you can actaully live with then you walk away, Tony was clearly willing to go quite far to get into office, but, and thsi is the big difference between him and Gillard, he was clearly not willing to pay any price for office as Gillard did.”

              Hahaha! Wow! Talk about trying to make the best out of failure! Since the majority of your post is trying to paint Tony’s loses as some sort of moral victory lets address that.

              Abbott lost these negotiations and you can assume that this was some sort of moral victory but the fact is that you don’t know. Hell, I don’t know what happened behinds those closed doors and there are probably only half a dozen people who do.

              Since neither of us actually can be sure about why Tony didn’t get taken to the dance lets look at your rationale instead.

              Your claim is that Tony made a moral choice to throw the negotiations because ‘it wasn’t worth it’ and that Gillard made some sort of ‘deal with the devil’ that she’s paying for now.

              I really wish that was true because nothing would make Abbott lose the leadership faster than that coming out. He was sent in to try and negotiate a way to form government, he failed. Speculate as to why all you like but you have no evidence just a hopeful gleam in your eye as you hug your Tony Abbott blow up doll.

              “The role of an opposition is to highlight the errors and misjudgements of the government,sadly for the country this current regime gives the opposition lots to work with.”

              Yes. The opposition is not currently doing this the current opposition is trying (and failing) to overthrow the government. It’s disrespectful of the democratic process to lose the election and then throw a tantrum for 3 years when if you had one you’d be expecting your opposition to do their job. It’s pitiful that you think this is responsible governance.

              “Yes and that is the problem isn’t it? The minority Greens tail has been vigorously wagging the ALP dog and now the people are calling for a vet to put down that poor palsied hound before his shaking infects us all.”

              You really are a drama queen aren’t you? Wagging the dog? Really? The Greens, so far, have gotten one, count em, ONE, major policy through parliament and that is the carbon tax. They can’t get traction on anything else they want to get done, (Marriage Equality, High Speed Rail etc) but you claim they have this massive influence over the sitting government.

              It’s paranoid nonsense and the facts do not support your position.

              “I am not the one having any kind of hissy fit. Here that affliction seems to be confined to you poor minions of the left who can see left leaning government that is in self-destruct mode and you really don’t know how to defend its indefensible stuff ups (apart from empty denial of the problems)or how to come to terms with its clearly terminal decline.”

              I’m sorry Pumpkin, I’m not on the left. Wanna take another swing at that one?Maybe use a slightly more sophisticated political model than ‘left and right’ (AKA ‘us and them’) and maybe sound like you know what you are talking about?

              • David Fawcett

                Hahaha! Wow! Talk about trying to make the best out of failure! Since the majority of your post is trying to paint Tony’s loses as some sort of moral victory lets address that.

                I don’t know how much buying and selling you have ever done David but I have done my share and its always been a case of I only want to buy if the price is right, as I see it had Tony bought a stay in the lodge at the sort of price that Gillard paid he would be just as stuffed as she is now. Gillard has bought a short term gain (of minority government) at the price of her personal credibility (the broken promise on a carbon tax) and long term she has utterly trashed brand Labor. Now you may wish to characterise that as a “successful negotiation” but I would say that its more like buying a Betamax VCR and then insisting that it will outlast VHS or that it will never be superseded by DVDs. Politics is a marathon rather than a sprint, sadly Julia forgot that when she agreed to Bob Browns terms.

                So who do you think won that Dutch auction again?

                Abbott lost these negotiations and you can assume that this was some sort of moral victory but the fact is that you don’t know. Hell, I don’t know what happened behinds those closed doors and there are probably only half a dozen people who do.

                Come off it we know enough to realise that the independents and the Greens milked the situation for all it was worth,Gillard got the nod because she was willing to sell her political soul to get it, clearly she reasoned that if she did not get in she would never get another chance to be PM again. Now its likely that you may not see Labor in power again for three terms at least, Yep that deal with Bob Brown sure looks like a cracker, for the coalition…

                Your claim is that Tony made a moral choice to throw the negotiations because ‘it wasn’t worth it’ and that Gillard made some sort of ‘deal with the devil’ that she’s paying for now.

                It was a moral choice, government at any cost is not worth having and as Gillard is demonstrating at present its is a toxic cocktail that will destroy the future of her party

                I really wish that was true because nothing would make Abbott lose the leadership faster than that coming out. He was sent in to try and negotiate a way to form government, he failed. Speculate as to why all you like but you have no evidence just a hopeful gleam in your eye as you hug your Tony Abbott blow up doll.

                I don’t actaully look at politics as an exercise in fandom, frankly I start form the simple proposition that we all have to choose the lesser of the evils and to my mind we should firstly choose a party that can be competent administrators, and then consider what its ideology espouses and while I admit that the colaition are not perfect they do come out rather better than Labor on the administration question(apart from Craig Thomson they don’t seem capable of organising a leg-over at a brothel),and any party that opposes the excesses of the global warming faith does all right on the ideology in my book

                Yes. The opposition is not currently doing this the current opposition is trying (and failing) to overthrow the government. It’s disrespectful of the democratic process to lose the election and then throw a tantrum for 3 years when if you had one you’d be expecting your opposition to do their job. It’s pitiful that you think this is responsible governance.

                Oppositions oppose and they do their darnedest to make thing uncomfortable for the government and part of that its seeking out and exploiting weakness when they find it. That is how our democracy works. I just don’t accept that an opposition should just sit meekly by until the next election is called, especially when the government holds power by such a shakey majority of one seat.

                You really are a drama queen aren’t you? Wagging the dog? Really? The Greens, so far, have gotten one, count em, ONE, major policy through parliament and that is the carbon tax. They can’t get traction on anything else they want to get done, (Marriage Equality, High Speed Rail etc) but you claim they have this massive influence over the sitting government.

                No, they got that one policy through despite the fact that only one candidate in the parliament went to the people promising a carbon tax, all of the nonsense about Gay marriage is down to the Greens, its not the number of policies that originate from the brown bunker but the fact that any do that matters here. As such it certainly justifies me invoking the imagery of a tail wagging its dog.

                I’m sorry Pumpkin, I’m not on the left. Wanna take another swing at that one?Maybe use a slightly more sophisticated political model than ‘left and right’ (AKA ‘us and them’) and maybe sound like you know what you are talking about?

                Well I’ve checked out your website and I don’t see any evidence that you are “not on the left” as you claim , in fact your belief in Gay marriage and AGW suggests that your self assessment is, err, not that accurate I would say that you are sort of soft centre left. Don’t get me wrong I do appreciate that most people have a rather mixed bag of beliefs and that simple political taxonomy is bound to be flawed but in some contexts such judgements and generalisations are useful.

                • “I don’t know how much buying and selling you have ever done David but I have done my share and its always been a case of I only want to buy if the price is right, as I see it had Tony bought a stay in the lodge at the sort of price that Gillard paid he would be just as stuffed as she is now.”

                  Economics 101 – Price is what you pay, value is what you get. What you are claiming is that Abbott didn’t value winning the election.

                  I think you are wrong and I suspect if we put that question to Tony he would tell you flat out that he did everything within his power to win the election. He lost, end of story and really Iain anything else you can say about it is just making excuses.

                  “I don’t actaully look at politics as an exercise in fandom, frankly I start form the simple proposition that we all have to choose the lesser of the evils and to my mind we should firstly choose a party that can be competent administrators, and then consider what its ideology espouses and while I admit that the colaition are not perfect they do come out rather better than Labor on the administration question(apart from Craig Thomson they don’t seem capable of organising a leg-over at a brothel),and any party that opposes the excesses of the global warming faith does all right on the ideology in my book.”

                  From you’re own statements, in the very post I’ve just quoted this is demonstrably untrue. You cannot be an excellent administrator AND be blocking the sitting government from effectively running the country. The opposition aren’t being effective administrators they are trying to hamper at every step – something that you yourself haven’t disagreed with and tried to justify.

                  You also seem to think that he only other choice that an opposition government has is to try and block the sitting government from getting things done. That simply isn’t true and strikes at the heart of what is currently wrong with the way ALL party politics works in this country. A deliberately process would result in much better policy and much more effective governance. If any of the parties truly had the best interests of their constituents at hand then they would put aside this partisan rhetoric and actually try and work together to govern as effectively as possible. The fact is that they don’t give two hoots what is good for the nation they only care about opinion polls and retaining power.

                  None of them deserve your support and frankly we all deserve much better than the pitiful options presented to us. I’m not annoyed at you being an apologist for Abbott any more than I get annoyed at apologists for Brown or Gillard.

                  “Well I’ve checked out your website and I don’t see any evidence that you are “not on the left” as you claim , in fact your belief in Gay marriage and AGW suggests that your self assessment is, err, not that accurate I would say that you are sort of soft centre left. Don’t get me wrong I do appreciate that most people have a rather mixed bag of beliefs and that simple political taxonomy is bound to be flawed but in some contexts such judgements and generalisations are useful.”

                  I dispute that Marriage Equality is either a left or right issue, Progressive rather than Conservative I’ll grant you.. And I think that is where we are having a miscommunication, for you what are at the ends of the left and right scale you are use?

                  For balance I’ll point out that I dig into Gillard, Abbott, Anna Bligh and my environmental policies tend to annoy the Greens.

                  • David and Iain, I really like pithy comments.

                  • David

                    Economics 101 – Price is what you pay, value is what you get. What you are claiming is that Abbott didn’t value winning the election.

                    No what I’m saying is that minority government at the behest of the loopy Greens and idiot “independents” is not worth selling your soul for. You are suggesting that power is worth any price that you can pay, that is the same sort of short term thinking that has sunk Gillard in the Polls.

                    I think you are wrong and I suspect if we put that question to Tony he would tell you flat out that he did everything within his power to win the election. He lost, end of story and really Iain anything else you can say about it is just making excuses.

                    He may have lost the first leg of the race but in the long run he will win , and win very convincingly , Gillard will not only lose the bigger race bit she will wreck her car in the process which makes her ‘victory” at the last election pyrrhic at best.

                    From you’re own statements, in the very post I’ve just quoted this is demonstrably untrue. You cannot be an excellent administrator AND be blocking the sitting government from effectively running the country. The opposition aren’t being effective administrators they are trying to hamper at every step – something that you yourself haven’t disagreed with and tried to justify.

                    Administration by a government is unaffected by an opposition opposing David. Administration is about just how a government manages service and policy delivery, how they design the schimes that they propose and how they make sure that there is adequate oversight. Time and again Labor have rushed policies out into the world before they are fully formed or before they have considered the consequences of what they propose. You can’t blame the opposition for that.

                    You also seem to think that he only other choice that an opposition government has is to try and block the sitting government from getting things done.

                    All that an opposition cna really do is debate the issues in both the house and with the public that has NO EFFECT on how a government manages its departments.

                    That simply isn’t true and strikes at the heart of what is currently wrong with the way ALL party politics works in this country. A deliberat(ive?) process would result in much better policy and much more effective governance. If any of the parties truly had the best interests of their constituents at hand then they would put aside this partisan rhetoric and actually try and work together to govern as effectively as possible.

                    That is pious nonsense David It may play well to those inclined towards supporting an “independent” candidate such as yourself but in the real world we know that it won’t ever work.

                    The fact is that they don’t give two hoots what is good for the nation they only care about opinion polls and retaining power.

                    The two things you cite (the good of the country and retaining power) are not of necessity mutually exclusive

                    None of them deserve your support and frankly we all deserve much better than the pitiful options presented to us. I’m not annoyed at you being an apologist for Abbott any more than I get annoyed at apologists for Brown or Gillard.

                    You see this is just why pious idealists never achieve anything in politics; you fail to realise that politics is the art of the possible, to the quest for idealogical perfection.

                    I dispute that Marriage Equality is either a left or right issue, Progressive rather than Conservative I’ll grant you..

                    I personally support some sort of civil union for homosexuals, and I have done so for many years, in fact I would argue that it is a regressive step rather than being any sort of progress.

                    And I think that is where we are having a miscommunication, for you what are at the ends of the left and right scale you are use?

                    Pretty much the same one that everyone else uses with an understanding that any judgement of an individuals position on any political spectrum is not of necessity fixed or permanent.

                    For balance I’ll point out that I dig into Gillard, Abbott, Anna Bligh and my environmental policies tend to annoy the Greens.

                    Well we all do our own thing as our conscience dictates don’t we?

                    Is that pithy enough Kim? 😉

                    • David Fawcett

                      You start off by suggesting that Abbott was excercising moral judgement (sticking to his ideals) when he couldn’t make and agreement with at least 2 of the Independents and you finish by saying that idealism has no place in Australian politics and that RealPolitick is as good as it gets.

                      Sir, at best you are being disingeneuous but when you can’t answer a simple question like, ‘What are at the polar ends of the poltical spectrum you are using?’ I think it’s pretty clear you don’t really know what you are talking about either.

                      Ignorant and full of it. By your own standards of ‘RealPolitick FTW’ maybe you should be running for something?

          • You don’t link to your blog David care to share the URL so I can check it out?

            • It’s impolite to spam someone else’s blog with URL’s to my own, so just click on my name.

            • David

              You start off by suggesting that Abbott was excercising moral judgement (sticking to his ideals) when he couldn’t make and agreement with at least 2 of the Independents and you finish by saying that idealism has no place in Australian politics and that RealPolitick is as good as it gets.

              Are you really trying to suggest that Abbot should have been willing to pay any price asked by the “independents” to get into the lodge?
              You misread my opinion of idealism in politics, like many things it has to be tempered with a view of what is possible and wise. I am not dismissing it out of hand as you suggest here.

              Sir, at best you are being disingeneuous but when you can’t answer a simple question like, ‘What are at the polar ends of the poltical spectrum you are using?’ I think it’s pretty clear you don’t really know what you are talking about either
              Come of it David that is a “how long is a piece of string” question, Now I have been following and arguing about politics for about forty years so I do actually know what I am talking about.

              Ignorant and full of it. By your own standards of ‘RealPolitick FTW’ maybe you should be running for something?

              For someone with political aspirations you are not that good at convincing people that your views make you worth voting for are you?

    • All right, well what about me? I am an ‘ordinary mum’, financially hard up, my husband is a tradie, two kids, local state schools, big mortgage, not vegetarian, not overly religious, drive cars, drink tea made from tea bags, shops for specials in local supermarket blah blah blah how much more cliched can you get. (We don’t live in a mcmansion or have a flatscreen tv, in fact almost all our furniture, clothes and appliances are secondhand as we can’t afford new and prefer decent quality) – I support the carbon tax, and so does my husband. ‘They’ don’t? Who are this amorphous ‘they’?

  8. I think Iain Hall should get a larger broom for his sweeping statements 🙂
    Heehee, with love of course.

    • I think his division between “the people” and all the people who are actually also the people, but whom he doesn’t like (currently choking on the ad hominem overload) is the first thing that needs sweeping away, like the dust it is.

    • That’s terrifying. Nicholasb, welcome to the News with Nipples (finally).

    • That was a really interesting article indeed. (Apart from the gratuitous fat-hatred – can’t quite see why so many writers have to sling around pointless insults when there are so many legitimate things for which to criticise these people!)
      But really does not surprise me – what does surprise me is why so many people are seemingly incapable of asking themselves ‘Cui Bono?”
      (Well ok, so I was brought up by a Latin teacher.)

  9. Oh wow, thank god someone is talking sense. This restored my faith in Australian’s. Too many people are misinformed of current topics of change in Australia like the carbon tax. One reason is because labour is doing such a bad job of informing the people and also because it allows ignorant propoganda such as the getcarbontaxright website and ads to pop up and spread lies (which are all backed by big business such as our coal and manufacturing companies).

    The fact is I am worried for Australia’s future because we are in the middle of such a delicate social and economic time. And I don’t want Abbot in power. Why? Because he supports mining far to strongly which means that Australia’s dutch disease (as bad as it is) will only get worse. And the fact that he is so out of touch with the common person as are the majority of the liberal party who are all rather wealthy and support big business because they want money. I mean we need public transport fixed for one thing however when the people making those decisions all drive 100k cars they don’t really fully appreciate the fact that the pakenham line doesn’t have enough trains nor does it match up with the bus time tables leaving people waiting 30mins+ for the bus they previously missed by 30 seconds. They will ruin the country and I don’t want rioting in my peaceful suburb because the country’s gone out of control.

    Labour may not be doing the best of jobs but they are doing the best for their situation and that’s good enough for me. ‘on ya Jules. And thank god that there are like minded people out there who don’t support ignorant protests like this or the people who enabled the entire situation.

    *end rant*

    • Yeah, when Abbott was going on about Gillard being “out of touch with everyday Australians” today, I had to laugh. At him, not with him.

      Jason Hedley, welcome to the News with Nipples.

  10. What about instead of going back to the polling booths every time a politician tells a lie, we just give everyone a ten gallon hat and let anarchy reign?

  11. On the Gillard government – I didn’t vote for them and would have preferred that the independants had done their jobs and back a conservative government. However that is all done and I think Abbott does himself no favours by carrying on so much. He will however win the next election even the ALP knows that. he could do so even sooner if Craig Thompson goes.
    Policy – Well Gillard did a deal with Wilkie (the turncoat slimeball that he is – crying in parliament over the deaths of soldiers he never knew what a cunt) on pokies. I HATE pokies however the proposed system will not stop problem gamblers. Problem gamblers pull off complex frauds to fuel their addiction, do they really think that they will be stopped by having a loody card? The downside to the paln is that financially struggling clubs (which is most clubs) will go close to the wall. So there’s my second job at risk cheers. Then she did a deal with the Greens ala the carbon tax which fails to exempt fuel for trucks which will punish an already battling industry (road freight) which is my day job at risk again cheers.
    On the original post I really hope you are as critical of the great unwashed masses who protest at G20 summits and APEC meetings and WYD events etc. Or is the vitriol reserved only for those who oppose your views?

    • Thanks for posting, kimsonof. It was a really interesting read since I don’t come across views like your very often. I really do mean that even though the rest of my post will seem to tear your post to pieces.

      “On the Gillard government – I didn’t vote for them and would have preferred that the independants had done their jobs and back a conservative government.”

      Wait.. What?

      The ALP isn’t conservative? When did this happen? And how exactly is it the job of independents to back conservative parties? If they were happy to do that that then presumably they would bother with running as independents..

      And really that’s just the start of my confusion.. This post when then goes on to suggest that Abbott is almost certainly going to win the next election and the ALP knows it.. Most current speculation seems to be revolving around if he’ll even be leader of the opposition in 1 years time. 2 years out from an election and speculation like this should really be treated as if someone was predicting the winner of the Melbourne cup in 2 years time.

      Some talk about Aussie battlers and battling industries and how they apparently they can’t survive without being propped up without being funded with tax dollars. Makes you wonder how pubs made money before they had pokies doesn’t it? The bit about the carbon tax includes diesel fuel is confusing this this has been ruled out until at least 2014 so I guess your day job is safe for another 3 years at least.

      Let’s paint a picture: doesn’t like Abbott cause he ‘carries on’ (I suspect not blokey enough), thinks the ALP isn’t conservative, believes the role of independents is to back the most conservative party, seems libertarian(ish) when it comes to personal freedoms but simultaneously promotes protectionist trade policies/government assistance to businesses and of course, is misinformed about the carbon tax (and I’ll bet thinks climate change is crap).

      Ladies and Gents, I think we have a honest to goodness teabagger here..

      • Nope, I disagree. I don’t believe kimsonof is a teabagger. Not at all. I don’t know him personally, he’s been coming here for a while and on some things we agree and on others we don’t, but there’s always a good reason for both.

        • David, I would have to agree with NWN here – I also disagree with many, many of Kimsonof’s ideas, but he as far as I can tell hasn’t bought them wholesale.

          • Kimsonof – ARE you a libertarian? In the Ayn-Rand-y sense?

          • You guys have a broader point of view than I do on this, it’s just he made some very common misconceptions that these teabaggers tend to make.

            As you pointed out doing the right thing isn’t simply doing what is best for you.

            The premise being that in the case of clubs, they produce externalities that have to be paid for by the community at large. They service two self destructive addictions, gambling and alcoholism and the libertarian point of view is, ‘It’s the choice of the individual, if they want to drink and gamble the state shouldn’t stop them.’

            Which is correct and if you ‘half-think’ it and stop there that’s what you get.

            The issues of externalities comes up when that person leaves the club and commits crime because they are drunk (violent crime and sexual assault stats jump dramatically when booze is involved) or has to rely upon community programs (state funded) in order to make ends meet. There is also a significant cost to any dependents reliant on the gambler and at the end of the day we all share that burden and have to pay for it.

            So why should this individual have to pay for a club that I don’t visit, just so they can make money. I’m not a customer but they are making money off me because they do not have to pay for the externalities, we do.

            • Ah, but the money gained from pokies does allow clubs to support groups in their community. Those donations would be tax deductible, so let’s not think it’s altruism on behalf of the clubs. And yes, some people are likely to lose their jobs. So kimsonof’s arguments are just as valid as mine. Because it doesn’t affect me directly, I can argue from the greater good point of view. But that’s little comfort to someone worried about their job. I also don’t think it’s helpful to call someone who disagrees with you a teabagger. Teabaggers are a whole lotta illogical crazy.

              Alcohol-related violence is a different matter. I’m not convinced that the place serving the alcohol should be blamed for the violence that happens once someone leaves, unless there is clear evidence that they should have stopped serving that person ages ago. Mind you, I’ve been incredibly drunk and still served alcohol in the wee hours of the morning, yet didn’t go and break something or someone on the way home. So, punishing the vendors of the alcohol isn’t the answer. It’s a knee-jerk response. I don’t know how we stop people being violent – that’s a question for the experts – but since the vast majority of us can get blind drunk and not commit crimes, why should we be punished too?

              This is not a black and white issue.

              • That’s why I posted the link to the Grog’s Gamut article about pokie reform, because it is very detailed and full of actual data about how things will/would be affected. Definitely worth a read.

              • Your first argument is nonsense because how the clubs choose to spend their profit’s isn’t even remotely relevant to how they made their profit. Your argument is like saying it’s ok to con someone if I give the money to the salvos.

                My point wasn’t that alcohol vendors are responsible for the violence that drunks cause only that they are profiting from that violence and therefore should bear a more significant portion of the burden for preventing and cleaning up after alcohol-related violence.

                You are right, this isn’t black and white so stop trying to make it a black and white issue will you?

                  • You build strawmen sometimes you get fire. 😉

                    Let’s cool off for a bit? My post addressed your concerns with regards to personal liberty. Taxing alcohol vendors and using the money to reduce alcohol related violence doesn’t infringe upon your personal liberties to get boozy with the girls.

                • David how do they profit from the violence? Are they selling tickets?

                  • Fair question McD. They profit off violence the same way cigarette companies profit of cancer. Alcohol abuse leads to increases in violence the same way smoking cigarettes leads to increases in cancer.

                    • Except that the majority of alcohol consumption does not lead to violence or abuse. Excess consumption, sure.

                    • David Fawcett

                      Ultimately what you’d want is a tax that exactly equals the costs involved with the externalities. To keep it simple lets say a tax that funds an extra police presence in areas that experience a lot of alcohol related violence and also covers the cost of cleaning up afterwards.

                      This provides an economic incentive for people to a) not drink excessively and b) for alcohol vendors to ensure they customers do not drink excessively. Why? Because if everyone behaves themselves there are less police needed and less costs for cleanup and the tax will be reduced.

                    • But they don’t profit FROM the violence, nor di cigarette companies profit from cancer. They profit from addiction, sure.
                      I am also reticent to say that alcohol causes violence. It raises the liklihood of violence in people who already have a propensity to that kind of behaviour.
                      I will stick my hand up and say that I drink to excess, sometimes on a weekly basis, and I have never assaulted someone or been in a fight, and I think I am in the majority there. No?

                  • McD. Smoking tobacco is known to cause cancer. Cigarette companies sell tobacco products. Cigarette companies also do not pay treat cancer victims. They profit from selling the cigarettes but they do not pay to clean up the negative effects that their product causes they leave that to the tax payer funded public health care system.

                    Fundamentally, it is no different to me charging people to get rid of garbage and then dumping on other people’s lawn so they have to pay to get it cleaned up.

                    Alcohol vendors also profit from the product they sell and that product leads to violent behavior. They don’t have to pay to police the violence, clean up after the violence, pay the victims or pay for treatment of alcoholics. *I* have to pay for that even though I hardly drink at all. I’m very glad you don’t get violent when you drink but there are enough people who do that it’s a problem.

                    Both you and NWN have made the argument ‘I don’t get violent when I’m drunk why should I be punished?’ which is awfully close to what climate change deniers say about the carbon tax.

                    The answer is the same alcohol vendor/carbon polluters can either clean up their act or pay the tax so the rest of us don’t have to clean it up for them.

                    My question to you is why do I have to pay more tax so you can get drunk on the weekend?

                    • No David, we have not made that argument at all. What we have both said is that MOST people don’t get violent when drunk, so rather than knee-jerk reactions, we AS A SOCIETY should be looking at why that violence is occurring and what we can do to stop it. Sure, it will take longer, but only an idiot would believe that lockouts and early closing times will do anything to stop alcohol-related violence. All it will do – and this was demonstrated in Melbourne when they trialled lockouts a few years ago – is that it just moves the violence somewhere else.

                      And your comment about this argument being close to climate change deniers just makes you look like an idiot. Climate change deniers deny that climate change exists. Our argument – and the argument put by a lot of people – is that alcohol-related violence does exist, but rather than knee-jerk reactions, we should deal with the source of the problem.

                      You are being ridiculous and just swinging at everyone.

        • Sorry to bring the smut, but I don’t know what teabagging means in this context, as far as I know teabagging has more to do with balls than blogs. Please explain!

      • I am fairly sure given that you ran in a safe Liberal electorate that on average 51% (as at the last election) of the elector you would have met would hold views more similar to mine than to yours (about 1.5%)
        Your dismally low vote count (do you have 1224 close friends and relatives) is not surprising if you honestly hold the view that the Australian Labor Party are a conservative party. Last time I checked (which is as I type) Socialist International is a left wing institution also welcoming of Hugo Chavez. The Prime Minister herself was secretary of the socialist forum. But actions speak louder than memberships I guess so let’s look at the major strategic policy line of the ALP in 2007 and 2010 – Anti-Workchoices. Workchoices whether you liked it or not was an attempt to de-regulate the labour market. The ALP has (as left wing institutions will do) over regulated that market. They have a passion for big government in other words – classic leftism.
        It is not the job of independents to back conservatives. Of course this is not what I was implying and against my better judgement I’ll assume you aren’t quite so stupid as to believe that it was. This of course means you were being deceitful. My point of course was that as both of these independents entered politics as Nationals and as Labor (and the Greens) polled dismally behind a second placed National Party (the ALP vote in Oakeshott’s electorate was their second lowest in the nation) one could safely assume that the majority of voters in their electorates would not have approved of their decision to back the ALP. In a democracy the wishes of the majority usually win out.
        Onto your next point, Graham Richardson knows Labor will lose, Paul Keating knows Labor will lose and if Labor is going to lose why in gods name would the coalition rock their own boat by changing leaders? Vicious factionalism whilst existent in the Liberal Party isn’t as overwhelming as it is in Labor.
        I would love to know how clubs prop up governments (with tax dollars) to the best of my knowledge (in other words I know for a fact) the biggest profit makers in terms of the pokies are all governments. I know that the club I work for hasn’t received a cent in funding from any government. What it does do is provide services that governments can’t or won’t provide.
        I am glad however that I’ll have a safe job for three years because as a low to middle income earner I obviously have the means to retire in my thirties.
        You really should lay off the heroin – I heard it’s bad for your health.
        In closing allow me to tender some advice should you decide to waste your electorates time again next election – maybe learn a bit about what the parties stand for, get a clue as to what your community stands for, come up with more serious policy documents than a couple of entries on a blog oh and send me some of your tears when the Liberal Party spanks you AGAIN.
        Oh and in reply to the attempted insult: WANKER!

    • Kimsonof, I laugh at stupidity in all forms, regardless of whether it’s left or right. Like those guys who go to anti-war protests and smash windows and cars. Fucking idiots.

      I support the pokies limit because I have friends who like to gamble when they’re depressed, and they lose hundreds, thousands, of dollars. It’s unlikely that they’d nominate $900 as the amount they’re willing to lose, but that’s how much they do lose. My support is based on personal experience, as is yours. The problem with looking at policy from personal experience is that we only think of how it affects us, not how it affects most of the people.

  12. Sort of on the subject, I know you would have seen this. http://www.smh.com.au/national/question-time-sees-jones-fly-off-handle-20110822-1j6ue.html
    What a horrible, horrible man.

  13. Anthony Green has written an article explaining in detail why a double dissolution is constitutionally impossible at this time. Recommended reading for anyone who likes their politics with a dose of facts.

    http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2011/08/calls-for-a-double-dissolution-are-just-ridiculous.html

  14. Oh wow, thanks for yesterday’s welcome Kim. I think I came to the right place for intellectual discussion as everyone here seems to be not only opinionated but have logical reason for their views.

    Having a quick squiz through some of your other articles I like what I’ve read. To think that I came to this after being pissed of just typing into google “convey of no confidence is ignorant” or something along those lines.

    Discussion is the only way to enlighten a misinformed society. I look forward to future articles from the news with nipples, kudos madam.

  15. Just because I have posted theis everywhere else… http://heathenscripture.wordpress.com/2011/08/22/joyce-katter-devine-last-bastion-against-the-gaypocalypse/

    It is pretty off topic, but I can’t think of anyone here who wont think this is hilariously amusing, and if you don’t I don’t really care.
    Cackle worthy, many times over.

    Sorry for hijacking, vagina face 🙂

  16. What a sad cowardly attack on people concerned about our country, this rally was attended by cattle farmers, citrus growers , dairy farmers transport people and business owners. It covered many issues and only those in the community and people who produce, create wealth and employment would understand the issues. I wonder if your aware that 92% of cattle farmers are in default of their loans, and they havnt had an income for 10 months, that there is 100 million kgs of oranges growers cant sell and when they they get 11 cent per kg, are you aware what the impact of a co2 tax will do? Can you estimate how many will be unemployed? This is the most disatrous gov in history, you comments on the insulation scheme and ber only confirm how far out of touch with reality you are. Perhaps when you buy a news paper you must read further than page 1 and the comics! You comment are worse than inaccurate and ignorant they are just stupid. But someone who campaigns for a tax that will achieve nothing more than send industry overseas cant be very smart.!! If you dont believe me look at whats happening, qantas moving off shore blue scope will close one plant but are looking for sites in asia , this is only the begining hundreds of companies will more off shore tens of thousands will lose thier jobs and the welfare bill will drag the gov further in debt. How could you possibly be so ignorant and stupid?

    • Um Terry, how is this sad or cowardly? My name is on this blog – Kim Powell in case you didn’t check my About page – so it’s hardly cowardly. And sad? How?

      And did you actually read the post? I said they were very welcome to protest, that they should protest about things they feel strongly about, but that doesn’t mean we should have another election.

      And no, I cannot estimate the number of jobs that will be lost as a result of the carbon tax, just as I cannot estimate the number of jobs that will be created by the carbon tax, because that is not my area. Just as it isn’t your area.

      Terry, your suggestion that I don’t read further than page one or the comics is just laughable. Perhaps you should have had a basic look around the place before you start flinging insults. Particularly when you can’t spell to save your life.

      Qantas moving offshore has nothing to do with the carbon tax. How could you “possibly be so ignorant and stupid?”

    • Terry – don’t come here and start with the name calling.
      Even some of the most opinionated bastards can hold a heated conversation here and not resort to being personally insulting, and those that occasionally are have earned a bit of latitude by being regular posters. You come in here with your Johnny-come-latelyness and start being rude to the owner of this blog and that is just not on.
      If you want to toss your toys out of the cot like a child, then get the fuck back to playcentre.

  17. Ber was a success? Who said so? The labour appointed auditor? I have seen the prices quotes and projects im in the trade you must be an absolute clown! More house burnt down before the insulation scheme? Yeh why spoil a story with the truth must be your motto. I notice how you havnt mentioned the 4 dead young installers murdered by rudd gillard and garrets incompetence, or perhaps the 300 asylum seekers drowned at see by this foolish gov, blood on thier hands is an understatement! Perhaps they were too busy sharing a motel room with thompson and some hsu credits

    • Terry, this is a place for intelligent debate. Come back when you want to play like an adult.

    • COMMENT:
      Terry it is wit wants like yourself who give conservatives like me a bad name. I agree that value for money was not achieved with respect to the BER however I defy anyone to identify a government program without cost blowouts. (by the way what is ‘the trade’?)
      NWN AKA Kim Powell is a career journalist whom I often disagree with however I respect her candour and intelligence, which is more than I can say about you Terry.
      You also come off as a bit of a mentalist when you accuse individual government ministers of murder because people died whilst employed under a scheme that they supported. Are you familiar with the terms slender thread or long bow?
      LESSON:
      *Labor not labour
      *quoted not quotes
      *houses not house
      *haven’t not havnt
      *sea not see
      *their not thier
      Also don’t forget to include the occasional comma (read your third sentence aloud) and capitals (Rudd, Gillard etc) I should also inform you that outside of accountancy et al numbers under 10 are usually written as words (so that’s F-O-U-R) I hope ‘the trade’ isn’t signwriting.
      QUESTION:
      What the hell does ‘…some hsu credits.’ mean?
      REQUEST:
      Would you mind fucking off?

  18. Very good guys rather than reply to fact you sling insults reading your reply is music to my ears, you claim to be so intelligent but you dont know what the ‘trade’ is? You dont understand that the person paying for the service under oh&s regulations is the principal contractor? And therefore rudd gillard garret are guilty of negligence that carries penalties of $1.2 m plus jail terms, Is this a spelling competition? Your attack on the protesters was ignorant and unfair, people there had been financially devastated and have seen years of hard work lost through incompetent gov. So why wouldnt they demand an election, we have situations now where elected mps dont represent their electorate, for Lynne 70% opposed a co2 tax oakshott has only 14% support. It seems the only comments you like from your reader are ones like ‘ your awesome’ really intelligent im so impressed. As for the spelling and use of capitals, commas etc i dont care what you think. I run a business with 30 staff so im very busy, i read blogs full of errors even from the hosts, and i guess the term fuck off you used is just a sign that you dont like criticism, grow up and discover the real world.

    • Sigh. You came here flinging insults, how did you really think this was going to go for you?

    • Well what is the trade? Are you a hairdresser, plumber, tiler, carpenter, pastry chef? There are many trades so the question spelt out in a more simple form for a more simple mind is what trade are you qualified in?
      As for discovering the real world, I served my country for a decade and lost my eye because of it. I have been to war zones and seen the worst that humanity has to offer, what have you done fuck bag? Stuff all that’s what so shut your cock holster.

      • Good one mate where did you lose the eye? In not whining im just telling you the facts , you can say whatever you want i know the truth and live with reality everyday. Btw if we are talking about buildings would i be a hairdresser? Or a pastry chef? I am a builder with full unlimited licences in every state. So i know a little bit about the ‘trade’ im not an armchair expert like yourself who figure being a expert speller would give you success in life. However mate if you have suffered an injury and disabillity as a result of service for this country ill grant you the respect you deserve, but perhaps you should look at all your comments on this site to ask yourself ‘am i being a bit bitter’ your language is that off the left so calling yourself a conservative is more an embarrasment to the right than i ever would be to you. As for company owers being illiterate you may many succesful people became that way by hardwork, determination, skill , sacrifice, taking risks and initiative. Things youll never know about or understand.

        • Terry, you were the one who turned up and started whining and slinging insults at us, so when we sling them back, you have to suck it up. You will never know what kimsonof’s life is like, just as I will never know what your life is like, so there’s no point acting like a petulant child and saying “things you’ll never know about or understand”.

        • Where did I lose it? I couldn’t find it when I got back from the pub. Beats me. As for me not being a conservative well I’ve had drinks with Howatrd and Hockey and have close friends in parliament for the Liberal Party.
          But hey I haven’t paraphrased Hadleys morning rant on someones blog so I can’t possibly be as conservative as you. In any case 130065506. Call it.

  19. Kim, sad because you insulted people facing hardship, cowardly because you write what ever you want but repliers are subject to sensorship.As for Qantas moving offshore, do you really believe many companies arnt already acting and preparing for a co2 tax? Do you think company directors will wait until they lose millions before they act? In the real world where people must compete for every dollar it is prudent to always plan ahead, failing to do so can be disatrous. You say the co2 tax will create jobs, really what jobs? Considering everything will be made in China including wind power generators and solar panels im wondering what real work will be created? Even German solar panel manufacture has moved to China. The co2 tax will cost my company $700k in lost business if there is as little as a 2% price increase, that will mean ill have to retrench 4 staff as soon as that increase takes effect, what shall i tell these guys as im handing them their severance pays? Oh dont worry fellas Kim Powell says there are lots of new jobs for you out there and Ms Gillard will ensure you are retrained! I think not Kim, my company is only small with 30 staff, and we are 1 of thousands that make up the small business community, Australias largest employers, how many more companies like mine will have to shed its work force. We cant all work for the public service or the mining companies. You can tell me to fuck off as many times as you like its just further evidence of your insensitivity and ignorance.

    • No, I did not insult people facing hardships. I said that Abbott supporters go on and on about Gillard lying yet are remarkably quiet over his constant changes of mind. Which makes me think they are stupid or selfish.

      As for your business, whatever it is, the tax will cost you because your business is not energy efficient. Deal with it and make your business better, instead of whining “oh, poor me”.

      As for ignorance, pot kettle black.

    • Aww we’re being insensitive boo hoo, would you like some cheese with that whine? How about a serve of french cries? Illiterate people shouldn’t be running companies in any case. I hope that your buildings are sturdier than your sentence structure.

  20. Kimsonof, conservative like you? Ber just a cost blowout? You have to be kidding, $450k for a project i had estimated at at $185k thats not a blow out my friend, thats just a ripoff! This is only one example, and how did this happen? Incompetent management. Insulation scheme, 4 dead, more than 200 homes burnt down, 1.5 billion wasted why? Incompetent management. Live trade exports knee jerk reaction, cattle producers destroyed, 800,000 head of cattle have the shot as farmers cant afford to feed them, why incompetent gov. Fair work Australia, unworkable, productivity lost, job security lost, unions running rampant, how did this happen? Incompetent gov. Closing down of the Pacific solution, as many as 300 people have drowned at sea, 7000 in detention, riots at detention centres, East timor fiasco, Malaysian sham deal, 3 billion spent, how has this happened? Incompetent Gov. Lost Productivity and exports of manufactured goods, excessive Gov. Spending and loss of consumer confidence creating stagflation, putting pressure on interest rates in both directions. Who has created this atmosphere? Incompetent gov. Kimsonof your not a conservative , your a suck!

    • Ok, I ummed and ahhed about publishing this comment, and I’m still not sure I should have done so. Want to talk about loss of consumer confidence? Then look at Abbott and Hockey. They are CONSTANTLY talking down the economy.

      If you think unions are “running rampant” and Fair Work Australia is no good, then you’re probably an arsehole boss who treats your employees like shit.

      Every government will run programs that don’t work, or don’t work very well.

  21. Kim firstly and most important i have 30 staff all of whom are above our union agreed eba rate which is also above award, under our eba we are to pay travel allowance to site workers but not to factory workers, however in fairness to the factory guys we pay them all. Our site workers get a travel allowance but we also give them a company car, one that they are welcome to use whenever they want for personal use no questions asked. Also we work interstate alot and always book them into good accomodation, the meal allowance is $7.50 per meal but we pay them $60 per day. At xmas as we are quiet in december we give them an extra week of with pay and over the years take them on a paid holiday. Last year we took the all to vietnam, before that bali twice and murray river house boats 3 times interestingly our customers have contributed 50% of the ticket cost. We have a policy that all new apprentices not be made to sweep floors or make coffee for the older tradesmen but to teach them as much as possible and give them responsibility so they learn and gain confidence. When our apprentices reach their first year i set them an acheivable challenge , they have all so far past the test so the company has purchased for them $1000 in tools. We pay all the overtime we contribute with a $100000 interest free loan when our staff purchase a home, car or need money for thier families. I have 1 young lad who has a drug problem whom i have taken under my wing to try and keep him on the straight and narrow rather than sack him as some would. We give our staff paint if they want to paint their homes and allow them to manufacture cabinets in the factory for thier own houses. We pay all over times, cbus, incolink prove the leaders with free telephones that they can use for personal use. Allow them to keep all salvage from defits and share amongst themselves. In 25 years not one staff member has left because they were not happy, maybe i am an arshole Kim.
    As for the opposition i beleive criticism of what they feel is bad policy is their job, Ms Gillard did that exceptionally well as does Mr Abbott. Anyway i only comment on one of these blogs if i read something and get fired up! But have cooled down now i stand by my comments but not any personal insults i may have made.

  22. Kim you claim my business could be more energy efficient, please tell me how, you must know something that i dont, i invite you to come to my factory and advise me, if you can find 1 way of saving by being more efficient i will happily concede to your every argument. You claim my business is not energy efficient, really? how? Please even give me one suggestion that is practical and will work. looking forward to your reply.

Go on, you know you have something to say...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s