Which political group do you perfer? (1 Viewer)

[Korn]

Yeah, cause anyone who supports the protection of the environment and pushing for equal human rights should be shot....

There will never be equal rights, the rich and powerful, will always have more rights then others, this isnt necessarily the case in Australia, but look at other countries, like the US

 

[Korn]

I'd just like to point out that with preferential voting no proper vote for a minor party is 'wasted'... Only an informal vote is a waste.

If everyone vote for a minor party, then they would gain seats and could press for issues they represent, if you mean a minor party could rule Australia, then unlikely, as they dont have the members necessary, but they could be a voice in parliment

 

[Korn]

Damn Straight... burn those ugly bloke looking lesbians..... preserve the hot female looking ones though, exemptions can be passed...

Do you understand the lesbians, true lesbians would never go for a male, they would only go for females, ur best shot at having two females would be bi chicks

 

[Vahl]

Bring on family first!

Burn the lesbians!

What is fucking wrong with you you piece of shit.
Give me your address and I'll endevour to educate you.

 

[Generator]

If everyone vote for a minor party, then they would gain seats and could press for issues they represent, if you mean a minor party could rule Australia, then unlikely, as they dont have the members necessary, but they could be a voice in parliment

Korn, try and think before you start typing away, OK?

 

[Korn]

Korn, try and think before you start typing away, OK?

How is that not true, if everyone votes for a party they win seats, as the party with most votes get seats, asn the party with the most seats gain power and influence in govt

 

[Generator]

luckily in your lifetime, u will be one of the many australians who waste their vote as the greens can't ever gain power if they keep holding hands with labor....

I'd just like to point out that with preferential voting no proper vote for a minor party is 'wasted'... Only an informal vote is a waste.

i stick with wasted

If everyone vote for a minor party, then they would gain seats and could press for issues they represent, if you mean a minor party could rule Australia, then unlikely, as they dont have the members necessary, but they could be a voice in parliment

We were discussing whether a proper vote for a minor party is a wasted vote or not, not what would happen if we all decided to vote for a minor party and preference Labor or the Coalition. With that in mind...

Korn, try and think before you start typing away, OK?

 

[Korn]

We were discussing whether a proper vote for a minor party is a wasted vote or not, not what would happen if we all decided to vote for a minor party and preference Labor or the Coalition. With that in mind...

Therefore my point is valid how can it be wasted, if everyone decided the same party, its the assumption that its wasted that ensures we live in a two party system

 

[Enlightened_One]

Korn does have a point somewhere in there. The party with the majority of seats in it's favour becomes the ruling party. But to pass any laws they need more than half the seats in the lower and upper house to pass the laws.

Say the Coalition wins 39 seats and Labor 35 (out of a hundred. I'm not a little Johnny supporter by the way). For the Libs to pass a law they must get another 12 seats to agree with their bill. These seats are most likely independent and will noly help the bill along if they see the good in it. Hence the independents gain power because the government cannot pass laws with out having them on side.

 

[llamalope]

well i hate them all, just personally. As I said before the last election....

howard's a liar
latham is a thug (and beazley's an old war horse)
browne is a criminal
hanson's a racist
and bartlett is a drunk.

and yes, these are all generalisations...

I liked natasha stott despoja (i can't spell so don't bother correcting me)... but since she resigned from leader, the democrats have just died

 

[M-turkey]

What about voting for a minority in a safe seat.

For Example, my area is a safe Labour seat, is there any point voting for the greens if its not going to affect the result?

I spose the only benefit would be helping them get at least 4% of the area vote so they get money out of it. (once a candiate gets at least 4% of the vote, they are awarded something like $1.90 for every vote they get).

 

[enterlogin2003]

hmm....i don't really like any. none of them benifit me in any way... but i would have to say that i'm a bit of a supporter for.....no....wait....sorry, i don't support any.

Well i think that your post is code for "i don't know what politics means and therefore i don't know what group to choose." Admit it, you were going to choose the KKK.

 

[mossup]

Well i think that your post is code for "i don't know what politics means and therefore i don't know what group to choose." Admit it, you were going to choose the KKK.

my my aren't we the feisty one! it was actually intended to show my lack of interest in absolutely anything!......yeah thats right...BE AFRAID LOGIN! BE VERY AFRAID!!!!

p.s. its an in house joke

 

[Generator]

I miss Korn.

 

[Calculon]

ROFL sextuple post, that's gold.

In relation to the topic I'm a proud member of the Liberal party.

 

[chubbaraff]

Yeh I really dont know how serious the guy from Newcastle is but its a disturbing trend, there is a re-emergence in politics world wide of neo-nazis, this is most noted in Germany where in the East they can attract up to 10% of the vote in their party, the National Democratic something arother, the people whose MP's walked out of Aushwitz anniversary silence. These people are infecting Australian society, they, in there teens and early twenties use words like "negriods" and dish out their uneducated vitriol all the time... John Howard would earn my respect if he brought back labour camps for these people, until then, proud left, proud Democratic Socialist...

Join the Socialist Alliance
www.socialist-alliance.org

 

[chubbaraff]

By the way all those liberals in the forum musn't have a problem with indebting young people with 100000$ for their reasonable 5 year degrees. cough.... You are cynical and a plain arsehole if you believe we cant afford to not have economic rationalism.

 

[Calculon]

Those are the fee paying students, who would not be able to be afforded to be funded under HECS under any government, so rather than having a choice between a fee paying place and not going to uni at all, they would only be faced with the latter option, and our universities would also be even more hard pressed to find funding than they currently are. The majority of bachelor degree students will be in debt for less than $40000, and the government is providing them with both subsidy for half (possibly more) of their education, as well as an interest free loan for the rest. Those who are undertaking university will draw a substantial benefit from it in the future, and as such they should be responsible for at least some of the cost.

 

[chubbaraff]

Yes, I agree with u in principle that HECS places be awarded on merit, however our failure to recognize that merit doesn't grow on trees is the more important issue. If you don't live in sydney and also dont go to a private school, you would be pressed to have be in an environment that could provide for you the resource to get to a great uai. People arent disadvantaged... they are disadvanteged by the system, education is something we can afford at all costs. If we had a properly socialised education system, there would be no need for self-pay. I would argue that it goes both ways.. and this is where a lot of young liberals dismiss the "leftish" argument if you wanna call it that. Government has a responsibility to provide adequately for all people throughout high schools, which it doesnt because this is compromised by the flood of funding out of the system to private schools with excessive resource. However the individual has a responsibility to earn the investment of his education by the govt. This cannot be bought. And should not be baught.

 

[withoutaface]

Yes, I agree with u in principle that HECS places be awarded on merit, however our failure to recognize that merit doesn't grow on trees is the more important issue. If you don't live in sydney and also dont go to a private school, you would be pressed to have be in an environment that could provide for you the resource to get to a great uai. People arent disadvantaged... they are disadvanteged by the system, education is something we can afford at all costs. If we had a properly socialised education system, there would be no need for self-pay. I would argue that it goes both ways.. and this is where a lot of young liberals dismiss the "leftish" argument if you wanna call it that. Government has a responsibility to provide adequately for all people throughout high schools, which it doesnt because this is compromised by the flood of funding out of the system to private schools with excessive resource. However the individual has a responsibility to earn the investment of his education by the govt. This cannot be bought. And should not be baught.

Yes there is an inequality depending upon which school you attend, but generally this is more than compensated for by schemes such as EAS, rural entry etc.