Tony Abbott has done it. He has stopped the boats.

[Parley]

So 82B put away is a waste of time.

Your beloved Labor party has p15ssed everything they were left up against the wall and usual left the country with a massive load of deficits which will last for years to come.

 

Now you will criticize the Liberl government when they have to make tough decisions to turn things around.

 

Your comments really dumbfound me how you can critizise the financial performance of Howard and Costello.

[MARYROSE02]

So, Utopia DOES exist in Scandinavia!? Their governments found the way to fund their welfare states & pensions, stimulate the private sector economy & without imposing pernicious taxation. Sounds marvellous! Are there any negatives? Sounds like the perfect model for France. Actually, it sounds perfect for everyone.

[flag of convenience]

So 82B put away is a waste of time.

Your beloved Labor party has p15ssed everything they were left up against the wall and usual left the country with a massive load of deficits which will last for years to come.

 

Now you will criticize the Liberl government when they have to make tough decisions to turn things around.

 

Your comments really dumbfound me how you can critizise the financial performance of Howard and Costello.

 

As I said the amount put away was little considering the almost decade long boom that has been underway. And yes 82 billion is very little compared to what was squandered by the Cons as well as Labor. By the way Labor are not my beloved party. They are Laberal of only a little more use than the lot you support.

 

Australia will pay for its extravagance over recent times and the opportunities lost by both sides. As I have said Norway, a nation of 5 Million has set itself up by putting away 660 billion, ever increasing. They still maintain a healthy welfare system as well as being as capitalist model.

 

Your comments don't dumbfound me, but don't be afraid to take a reality check into the spendings of the Howard government.

[flag of convenience]

So, Utopia DOES exist in Scandinavia!? Their governments found the way to fund their welfare states & pensions, stimulate the private sector economy & without imposing pernicious taxation. Sounds marvellous! Are there any negatives? Sounds like the perfect model for France. Actually, it sounds perfect for everyone.

 

Forget about France and stay with countries you may know a little about. They could well be a measure or blueprint for Australia, rather foundering at the moment.

Negatives, well the winters are still rather bleak with little day light, but the summers of 24 hour light sort of make up in part for it. House prices lost their way like OZ, a big negative in Sweden and Norway although rental protection is in place in those countries.

[flag of convenience]

In these economic times flag there are plenty of people with degrees of both sexes sat on their backside with no job and quite a few working in Tesco. Depends what degree you do to some extent I know. There are loads of people that go to uni these days as they can't think of anything else to do.

At least here the women have as much chance of scoring an apprenticeship or a job as a truck driver on the mines as a guy does.

 

I'm not referring to truck drivers but professional qualifications. Law is one over subscribed. There certainly will be an over inflated number of degree holders as there will be tradesmen at some point in the cycle. Europe has loads of unemployed degree holders. Asia used to. Just too many people chasing too few positions during more normal times.

[flag of convenience]

And finally back on topic. Had to smile with the write up in The Sydney Morning Herald, advocating exactly what I have been saying for months. The solution being controlled intake from Indonesia. An increase in refugee intake and the closing of off shore detention camps.

[ramot]

I forget what was this post was originally about??? hijacked as usual!

 

Posted as above poster was posting

[MARYROSE02]

Forget about France and stay with countries you may know a little about. They could well be a measure or blueprint for Australia, rather foundering at the moment.

Negatives, well the winters are still rather bleak with little day light, but the summers of 24 hour light sort of make up in part for it. House prices lost their way like OZ, a big negative in Sweden and Norway although rental protection is in place in those countries.

 

I looked at the article from The Economist, and at some other articles giving an alternative view. I don't know who to believe! How do the Scandanavian countries fund their welfare state?

 

I noticed that, apart from Sweden, the Nordic countries all have very low levels of immigration, compared to 'us', and poverty is high amongst Sweden's immigrant population.

 

Norway is a major oil producer, hence its huge revenues, albeit it with a high foreign debt. (What happens when the oil runs out?)

 

The Nordic governments are not actually socialist and are rather kind to capitalists, although Sweden did allow Saab to go broke and sell Volvo to a Chinese company.

 

British governments, whether Labour or Tory cannot afford to pay indexed old age pensions to its citizens in Australia, nor can they afford to pay for nursing home care for its citizens. (Same in OZ too.)

 

I am not entitled to welfare here in Australia because I am means tested. Silly me perhaps for building up some assets.

 

I know that France, like many other countries is going to face huge problems paying for pensions.

 

Here's one little cut and paste I read, just a small one! Interesting to wonder how Nordic countries can maintain welfare spending at ten percent more than the average. Of course, they mostly have low immigration. Is that a factor?

 

The Nordic countries, which have been long famed for their generous welfare states, are counting the cost and finding they can no longer afford such entitlements for their citizens.

Denmark’s finance minister is talking about modernisation to preserve it competitiveness with other countries.

Finland’s government has just announced a long-term plan to start scaling back its welfare system, one of the most generous in the world.

Sweden has slashed unemployment benefits and sick-leave compensation.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development recently calculated what its members spend. France tops the list devoting 33 percent of its gross domestic product on welfare.

It is followed by Denmark (30.8 percent), Belgium (30.7 percent), Finland (30.5 percent) and Sweden (28.6 percent).

The average for all OECD countries is 21.9 percent.

Even as as economies are growing slowly or even declining, governments are having to deal with higher levels of unemployment and aging populations which will mean more spending on pensions and health care.

Seeing their current levels of spending as unsustainable some government are moving preemptively to make sure they keep their AAA credit ratings.

The OECD says countries have to make changes now to preserve their welfare societies for the future.

Copyright © 2014 euronews

[Paul1Perth]

And finally back on topic. Had to smile with the write up in The Sydney Morning Herald, advocating exactly what I have been saying for months. The solution being controlled intake from Indonesia. An increase in refugee intake and the closing of off shore detention camps.

 

Wasn't that what Julia Gillard wanted, but an increased intake from Malaysia? Same difference I suppose, trouble is it didn't get support from the other parties.

[MARYROSE02]

And finally back on topic. Had to smile with the write up in The Sydney Morning Herald, advocating exactly what I have been saying for months. The solution being controlled intake from Indonesia. An increase in refugee intake and the closing of off shore detention camps.

 

Controlled intake from Indonesia? When have they ever excercised any control, despite the fact that the boats are owned by Indonesians, crewed by Indonesians, and leave, seeming at will, from Indonesian ports? You would think that Indonesia had no navy, no customs, no immigration/emigration controls.

 

Why should our refugee intake be increased? Who says that we do not take in enough as it is? Don't we comply with our UN treaty requirements regarding refugee intake?

 

What is wrong and/or racist with the Australian government deciding who comes into our country?

 

I have a friend who came here on a 457 visa. Last year, he lost his job. I was shocked when he told me he was entitled to no benefits from the Australian government. He worked. He paid taxes. I assume he had to pay for his visa? 'I'm skint' he said to me.'I have spent my savings. I have no money in England to transfer here. I can't get dole. I just use my credit card.'

 

And I'm an Australian citizen, and I can't get any benefits either when I am out of work.

 

Why should we believe someone who tries to come into the country illegally without documents when they claim to be refugees? Where does the money come from to pay for their upkeep, when we do not have enough to take care of our own citizens?

[Diane]

Good advice from South Australia's potential (Liberal) leader Steven Marshall here ahead of our State Election tomorrow http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-14/gaffe-as-liberal-leader-steven-marshall-urges-vote-for-labor-in/5321360 - I reckon Tony Abbott's visit to 'help him out' yesterday did exactly the same as the Greens' MP said in his much publicised speech "every time Tony Abbott opens his mouth means another vote for (a different party)" Made me laugh anyway! Anyone taking part in a local March in March on Sunday?

[Paul1Perth]

Good advice from South Australia's potential (Liberal) leader Steven Marshall here ahead of our State Election tomorrow http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-14/gaffe-as-liberal-leader-steven-marshall-urges-vote-for-labor-in/5321360 - I reckon Tony Abbott's visit to 'help him out' yesterday did exactly the same as the Greens' MP said in his much publicised speech "every time Tony Abbott opens his mouth means another vote for (a different party)" Made me laugh anyway! Anyone taking part in a local March in March on Sunday?

 

What are you marching for Diane? Or is it just for the exercise?

[Rossmoyne]

What are you marching for Diane? Or is it just for the exercise?

 

Exercise probably.

[flag of convenience]

Wasn't that what Julia Gillard wanted, but an increased intake from Malaysia? Same difference I suppose, trouble is it didn't get support from the other parties.

 

Not exactly. There is a lot of misconception and plain ignorance around the entire issue. Hence the knee jerk reactions and the almost permission for racial slurs.

 

No in the case of Malaysia, the government wanting to exchange arrivals here for 4,000 refugees holed up in Malaysia. (generally from within Burma) Malaysia would have made the best of the deal as from memory I believe it was only 800 that would have been sent.

 

Abbott and Morrission said no due to Malaysia not being a signatory to the UNHCR Convention, as well as the fact caning and death sentence in place in that country. Shows very clearly the double standards and lies told in politics.

 

Of course Gillard may have got the jump on the Lib's and successfully prevented further boat arrivals if allowed to go ahead. The half baked off shore policy would likely never have eventuated nor so many lost at sea. The Lib's certainly have a lot to answer for.

[MARYROSE02]

"What do we want?

 

"More power for Rupert Murdoch!"

 

"When do we want it?"

 

"Now!"

 

"Perth, Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, we will fight, we will win, Bill, Bill Bill Shorten."

 

I see that the protest leaders are calling for peaceful protest and no offensive banners (no **** Tony Abbott T shirts either.) Trouble is, how do you keep the anarchists and the Trots out of it?

[MARYROSE02]

Not exactly. There is a lot of misconception and plain ignorance around the entire issue. Hence the knee jerk reactions and the almost permission for racial slurs.

 

No in the case of Malaysia, the government wanting to exchange arrivals here for 4,000 refugees holed up in Malaysia. (generally from within Burma) Malaysia would have made the best of the deal as from memory I believe it was only 800 that would have been sent.

 

Abbott and Morrission said no due to Malaysia not being a signatory to the UNHCR Convention, as well as the fact caning and death sentence in place in that country. Shows very clearly the double standards and lies told in politics.

 

Of course Gillard may have got the jump on the Lib's and successfully prevented further boat arrivals if allowed to go ahead. The half baked off shore policy would likely never have eventuated nor so many lost at sea. The Lib's certainly have a lot to answer for.

 

 

You can't blame the 1,000 drownings on the Liberals. It was all the ALP's fault. They changed the policy, thus encouraging the boats. Now Abbott has stopped them, and there's no more drownings again.

[Paul1Perth]

Not exactly. There is a lot of misconception and plain ignorance around the entire issue. Hence the knee jerk reactions and the almost permission for racial slurs.

 

No in the case of Malaysia, the government wanting to exchange arrivals here for 4,000 refugees holed up in Malaysia. (generally from within Burma) Malaysia would have made the best of the deal as from memory I believe it was only 800 that would have been sent.

 

Abbott and Morrission said no due to Malaysia not being a signatory to the UNHCR Convention, as well as the fact caning and death sentence in place in that country. Shows very clearly the double standards and lies told in politics.

 

Of course Gillard may have got the jump on the Lib's and successfully prevented further boat arrivals if allowed to go ahead. The half baked off shore policy would likely never have eventuated nor so many lost at sea. The Lib's certainly have a lot to answer for.

 

Indonesia aren't signatory to the UNHCR convention either and have the death penalty, caning should be brought back in schools here IMO. So can't see the difference with a deal with Indonesia.

[flag of convenience]

Controlled intake from Indonesia? When have they ever excercised any control, despite the fact that the boats are owned by Indonesians, crewed by Indonesians, and leave, seeming at will, from Indonesian ports? You would think that Indonesia had no navy, no customs, no immigration/emigration controls.

 

Why should our refugee intake be increased? Who says that we do not take in enough as it is? Don't we comply with our UN treaty requirements regarding refugee intake?

 

What is wrong and/or racist with the Australian government deciding who comes into our country?

 

I have a friend who came here on a 457 visa. Last year, he lost his job. I was shocked when he told me he was entitled to no benefits from the Australian government. He worked. He paid taxes. I assume he had to pay for his visa? 'I'm skint' he said to me.'I have spent my savings. I have no money in England to transfer here. I can't get dole. I just use my credit card.'

 

And I'm an Australian citizen, and I can't get any benefits either when I am out of work. I can't get benefits either.

 

Why should we believe someone who tries to come into the country illegally without documents when they claim to be refugees? Where does the money come from to pay for their upkeep, when we do not have enough to take care of our own citizens?

 

I have stated many times the need to access refugees from Indonesia. 50 a year was hardly an incentive to Indonesia to co operate. Refugee intake should be increased as it is low by international standards, with 25,000 or around there a respectable number.

Another reason, Australia is a settler country. It has taken/poached people from around the world, sometimes trained at great cost by poor developing world states or advanced states for that matter. As such it should play its hand at being a responsible global citizen.

 

You certainly don't keep up to speed if shocked when a 457 loses their job and no benefits. Why should they? They are expected to know the rules. When a job is no more that's it if can't find another leave. Job could likely have gone to a local anyway.

We certainly don't want to pay the dole to 457's. It is supposed to be a professional role so one would assume well paid for its duration. Why would the person even consider the dole?

 

I guess off loading that inherited house in Hampshire may ease the way centre link payments. Feel a little sympathy for the asylum seekers on bridging visa's who would love to work but not allowed to under government policy.

 

Instead of constantly sprouting anti refugee rhetoric , why not take the baseball bat the a government that disallows folk to work, pays them less than Newstart, impacting on the problems already in place. I suppose it's more easier to follow the herd and put the collective boot in the least deserving of a kicking.

[jjgibbs]

Reading this makes me laugh

 

 

Some of you are so far off the mark it's unreal.

[flag of convenience]

Indonesia aren't signatory to the UNHCR convention either and have the death penalty, caning should be brought back in schools here IMO. So can't see the difference with a deal with Indonesia.

 

Your still not getting it. I have said countless times Indonesia's position within the UNHCR. Which is why it needs to be worked on. There are facilities in place holding folk already decided as refugees within Indonesia. Hence UNHCR picks up the tabs and Indonesia goes along with it. They will certainly want to see a far greater number being resettled than now which Australia can easily do.

 

As for caning we are not talking about school caning. In the Malaysian context, it is known as the rotan(cane) administered by a beefy military fellow across the back. I have actually met a fellow that used to give it out. Not a pleasant outcome for the receiver. Besides the weeks of recovery the embarrassment during delivery must be equally off putting. Rather barbaric but dished out in both Malaysia and Singapore. I trust you don't think that a good idea for schools?

[flag of convenience]

Reading this makes me laugh

 

 

Some of you are so far off the mark it's unreal.

 

Perhaps you could explain the cheeky bits that entice you to cackle.

[flag of convenience]

You can't blame the 1,000 drownings on the Liberals. It was all the ALP's fault. They changed the policy, thus encouraging the boats. Now Abbott has stopped them, and there's no more drownings again.

 

I don't necessary blame anyone into the drownings. Adults get onto a boat at free will and as such there is a risk factor involved. All would be aware of that. Saying that if the Con's hadn't been so obtrusive towards the Malaysia issue, especially on the grounds given, the matter could have been brought under control without the suffering that followed.

[jjgibbs]

I'll leave you with this I work for immigration and if I could tell you the half of it I would.

[flag of convenience]

What are you marching for Diane? Or is it just for the exercise?

 

Quite a few reasons I could think off hand. Exercise being the least of them.

[flag of convenience]

I'll leave you with this I work for immigration and if I could tell you the half of it I would.

 

I'm afraid where you work doesn't cut the mustard. If you have a comment to make then make it and a public service posting does not make you au fait with the subject at hand.