Liberal or Labor? (3 Viewers)

[Lentern]

a better question for this thread would be:

Abbott or Rudd?

...they are two different questions with different answers - AND THAT IS THE GOSPEL TRUTH.

Then start a thread about that. The debate between social democracy and liberal democracy is a reasonable one in itself.

 

[Slidey]

I was pretty sold on Abbott, but the 'tough on asylum seeker business is incredibly fucked up, I can't get behind that.

Indeed.

 

[cosmo kramer]

The people who sympathize with and want to set the policies for asylum seekers remind me of the authorities in that wonderful 1970s French novel The Camp of the Saints. My favourite part of that book was when the professor was lecturing on tolerance and compassion for the asylum seekers and the main character calmly takes out a revolver and shoots him in the head.

 

[Garygaz]

my problem with abbott is that he seems like a loose cannon, too unpredictable. whilst i've lost faith in krudd, he does what a prime minister should, presents well in interviews, is consistent and doesn't make outlandish statements.

I would have been happy to vote liberal this election if turnbull was still leader, he is much more authoritative and consistent leader. i thought he showed great courage as opposition leader backing the government's ets.

On the other hand you've got abbott whos political tactics is to unequivocally slam every government policy. I believe criticism is warranted where it is due, but there are some policies which just make common sense which he still finds some angle to hit off on.

tl;dr this election feels like there is nothing inspiring to come of it

 

[jeshxcore]

in regards to political parties.. we are screwed.
both parties are bad.
we really have no choice.
liberal - has no idea what they're doing.. especially phoney tony.
labor - manipulative and broken promises.
i would rather vote for someone who knows what they're doing (labor) rather than a bunch of cows who only know how to slag off, only to find that they themselves don't know how to be decisive and create strong policies that won't be backed down because of bad publicity (liberal)
but both are just as bad

 

[SylviaB]

no parties

kill politicians

 

[Lentern]

no parties

kill politicians

First kill all the lawyers.

 

[Existential]

Then start a thread about that. The debate between social democracy and liberal democracy is a reasonable one in itself.

no need to start a thread on it. comments in this thread have made it clear.

there's nothing wrong with debating political philosophy, but one must reflect on politics to do so. you can't understand one without the other. after all, politics is about the people.

 

[Existential]

[/B]

my problem with abbott is that he seems like a loose cannon, too unpredictable. whilst i've lost faith in krudd, he does what a prime minister should, presents well in interviews, is consistent and doesn't make outlandish statements.

I would have been happy to vote liberal this election if turnbull was still leader, he is much more authoritative and consistent leader. i thought he showed great courage as opposition leader backing the government's ets.

On the other hand you've got abbott whos political tactics is to unequivocally slam every government policy. I believe criticism is warranted where it is due, but there are some policies which just make common sense which he still finds some angle to hit off on.

tl;dr this election feels like there is nothing inspiring to come of it

i agree with you 100%.

 

[Existential]

in regards to political parties.. we are screwed.
both parties are bad.
we really have no choice.
liberal - has no idea what they're doing.. especially phoney tony.
labor - manipulative and broken promises.
i would rather vote for someone who knows what they're doing (labor) rather than a bunch of cows who only know how to slag off, only to find that they themselves don't know how to be decisive and create strong policies that won't be backed down because of bad publicity (liberal)
but both are just as bad

agreed.

 

[Existential]

no parties

kill politicians

First kill all the lawyers.

lol there not all bad.

just like not all priests are child molesters.

NB. Many politicians were lawyers before they entered politics.

 

[Slidey]

Fuck it, Lauchlan started a new account (Existential in case it isn't obvious by his spamming threads with retarded comments).

Time to put him on ignore again.

 

[Calculon]

Quick question:

OK so say you have a government stimulus that includes a program to build roads or factories or something like that (efficacy of said stimulus not withstanding).

From an Austrian perspective, is there any economic benefit whatsoever to any future (i.e. when there is an upswing) increase in productive capacity relating from those programs?

There is some benefit, but it's less than what the market would have put those people to work doing, so there's a deadweight loss (and the value of this deadweight loss is the number of people you might as well be paying to dig holes and fill them in again). The idea that it's a stopgap for unemployment while the private sector recovers is also bunkum, cf 2000 insulation workers still on the dole.

 

[Lentern]

Fuck it, Lauchlan started a new account (Existential in case it isn't obvious by his spamming threads with retarded comments).

Time to put him on ignore again.

Do we know this somehow or are we going on the general Lauchlanesque vibe of the posts?

 

[Slidey]

Do we know this somehow or are we going on the general Lauchlanesque vibe of the posts?

Vibe. Strong vibe. Consider that he just posted 4 replies in a row, none of which were worth reading. Consider also that Lauchlan has gone missing.

 

[SylviaB]

-In order to "stimulate" the economy, the government has to spend money

-Government has no money of its own, so it has to get money through taxation

-Taxation screws up the structure of production (e.g. it becomes increasingly less profitable to invest time/money into a venture after a certain point because of taxes, and so overall growth is reduced)

-Stimulus spending can be of some gross benefit to the economy

-However, damage done by taxation in order to stimulate will always necessarily be greater than the benefit from the stimulus, and so on net balance stimulus spending is harmful

 

[Lentern]

-However, damage done by taxation in order to stimulate will always necessarily be greater than the benefit from the stimulus/QUOTE]

No, thats just a lie. You cannot put that forward as an accepted truth, its not one.

 

[SylviaB]

No, thats just a lie. You cannot put that forward as an accepted truth, its not one.

yeah i can

when someone invests in something its because there are profits to be made i.e. a demand is being supplied

government however does not work on the basis of profits, losses and prices, and so it is detached from the structure of production
Which means spending will never be as productive as private investment

 

[hn92]

i wish costello or keating were still running for gov ! but for now, labour > libs.
abbot seems unequipped to run a country. too conservative & old fashioned to be able to function in global politics imo.

 

[Existential]

i wish costello or keating were still running for gov ! but for now, labour > libs.
abbot seems unequipped to run a country. too conservative & old fashioned to be able to function in global politics imo.

you have a point