Who to vote for?

John U

Well-Known Member
Look through history and you will see that the typical trend is that liberal governments create a kitty and the Labour one spend it.
You can hand pick examples of wasted funds on both side, look at the stupid Pink Batts debarkle for instance
I am with Matt on this with regards to corruption. Anyone who thinks it happens more on one side of the fence than the other is kidding themselves. Those type of people are opportunistic and appear everywhere
Keep in mind that many labour pollies have come through the ranks of the unions and are often not the most umm honest citizens :rolleyes: and have a mindset of getting more more more not managing viable business plans.
Liberals ’good’ economic management significantly benefits from privatising public assets, which mostly ends in worse outcomes for the end user.

Howard government sold our gold reserves for $US 270/ounce. The going rate had been about $400 US/ounce for years. Following that sale gold reached $2000 US/ounce and now sits over $1000 US/ounce.

ALP doesn’t have a clean slate in privatisation, selling off the Comm Bank, which wasn’t a great move. They have far less appetite for it than LNP though.

If the LNP is as good/bad as the ALP then there should be plenty of examples to supply evidence of such.
 

boobook

Well-Known Member
Howard government sold our gold reserves for $US 270/ounce. The going rate had been about $400 US/ounce for years. Following that sale gold reached $2000 US/ounce and now sits over $1000 US/ounce.

Hmm. Howard and Costello didn't sell 1 cent of gold. The reserve bank did. Independently of the government at the time, just like it is always, libs or labour. And also FYI gold is about $USD 1950 at the moment. Is a volatile commodity.
 

Krumpy

Member
And in another 8 years with different government there will be a whole new list of corruption, lies and self interest
They are all as bad as each other in that respect and anyone who thinks any party either left or right is any worse or better is kidding themselves
One of them has federal ICAC as a policy and one doesn’t. That certainly points yo one being more corrupt
 

John U

Well-Known Member
Hmm. Howard and Costello didn't sell 1 cent of gold. The reserve bank did. Independently of the government at the time, just like it is always, libs or labour. And also FYI gold is about $USD 1950 at the moment. Is a volatile commodity.
'In November 1997 the then Treasurer, Peter Costello, shocked some people when he announced he'd signed off on the sale of $2 billion worth of Australian bullion. On the day he announced the sale the price was around $US306.00 an ounce. At the time, according to Mr Costello, gold "no longer plays a significant role in the international financial system".'

 

boobook

Well-Known Member
'In November 1997 the then Treasurer, Peter Costello, shocked some people when he announced he'd signed off on the sale of $2 billion worth of Australian bullion. On the day he announced the sale the price was around $US306.00 an ounce. At the time, according to Mr Costello, gold "no longer plays a significant role in the international financial system".'

I think you'll find he signed of on the money going back into the reserve bank, not the actual sale.

 

discomatt

Well-Known Member
Reckon we might've covered this before Matt.
Yes we have and it is a perfect example of how both sides of politics are dishonest, deceitful and very wasteful when it comes to our hard earned taxes
I love my Land Rovers, they have taken me all over this fantastic country :D
 

Mick_Marsh

Active Member
At least Nobody has mentioned Land Rovers yet!
You just did.

I have been noticing lots of yellow T shirts being worn by proud UAP supporters.
The Greens realise, in this electorate, they are so "on the nose", they aren't even prepared to field a candidate.
We've had a LNP and an ALP letter drop.
I have no idea who else is running, apart from an independant.
Generally speaking, no one seems to be interested in the election. Maybe that will change as the date draws closer.
 

boobook

Well-Known Member
Good economic management
John, I don't think anyone will disagree that was $55m that need not have been spent. But remember every single one of these refugees came under Labor's watch. And the libs were again left to clean up the mess.

The good news is that of the $55m. $40m went to humanitarian aid in Cambodia, and $15m went to international agencies supporting refugees. So in the context of the disaster that Labor caused, yes very well spent.

That's a great example of why I find it hard to support labour and their costly ill thought out ideas. Just a bunch of unionists, party hacks and failed lawyers who have no practical experience in managing anything other than ballot cards and membership manipulation.
Look at their current asylum policy. Definitley, positively maybe no asylum intakes one day none the next. Plus 10 front bench opposition who vow to start the show again. Good by $Billions again.
 
Last edited:

Albynsw

Well-Known Member
Good economic management

Agree it is far from ideal but only a small portion of the cost the taxpayers incurred sorting out the mess that Labor created in the first place. Don’t you think they should be the ones held accountable for that not to mention the humanitarian aspect that came with it?
 
Top