Yeah, Vote {HARD} Labour.....NOT!
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: PaulpULVITZKA on 11 Aug 2010 20:28 "Labor is borrowing $100 million a day to pay back Government debt" Dudd arrived into office with a surplus, all gone, and more,.......LOTS MORE..... Not only will your GRANDKIDS be paying this back [let alone your children] but your NEXT Generation will too..... http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/26/2964184.htm?section=justin The new Julia [born in Wales, should be like USA policy, NOT allowed to be in High-Office] is as bright as the "old" Julia, great back- stabber though! I weep for the future of this once great country............
From: Clocky on 12 Aug 2010 02:11 "PaulpULVITZKA" <pulvitzka(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:f6b26270-3de9-4fd2-990a-ca2dd886f0bd(a)k1g2000prl.googlegroups.com... > "Labor is borrowing $100 million a day to pay back Government debt" Do you think the Liberals would have let Australia slip into a full recession by not stimulating the economy? > Dudd arrived into office with a surplus, all gone, and > more,.......LOTS MORE..... Do the letters GFC mean anything to you? Wasn't it better to spend money, save jobs and prevent going into recession whilst the economies of countries like the UK and the US and rest of Europe were going down the tube? There were fuckups along the way, sure, but things could have turned out a lot worse too.
From: Jason James on 12 Aug 2010 03:05 "Dr Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF" <""Trollene.has.had.more.kook.outs.than.ive.had.hot.dinners\"@kangarooistan.com.au .."> wrote in message news:4c639513$0$28668$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > Cocky wrote: >> "PaulpULVITZKA"<pulvitzka(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:f6b26270-3de9-4fd2-990a-ca2dd886f0bd(a)k1g2000prl.googlegroups.com... >>> "Labor is borrowing $100 million a day to pay back Government debt" >> >> Do you think the Liberals would have let Australia slip into a full >> recession by not stimulating the economy? >> >>> Dudd arrived into office with a surplus, all gone, and >>> more,.......LOTS MORE..... >> >> Do the letters GFC mean anything to you? > > They don't to the rest of the world. > >> Wasn't it better to spend money, > > Spend or waste it? > >> save jobs and prevent going into recession whilst the economies of >> countries >> like the UK and the US and rest of Europe were going down the tube? >> There were fuckups along the way, sure, but things could have turned out >> a >> lot worse too. > > So why is unemployment going up again? What exactly, did the Labour party do wrong during the "world recession"? Jason
From: Clocky on 12 Aug 2010 03:28 "Dr Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF" <""Trollene.has.had.more.kook.outs.than.ive.had.hot.dinners\"@kangarooistan.com.au .."> wrote in message news:4c639513$0$28668$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > Cocky wrote: >> "PaulpULVITZKA"<pulvitzka(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:f6b26270-3de9-4fd2-990a-ca2dd886f0bd(a)k1g2000prl.googlegroups.com... >>> "Labor is borrowing $100 million a day to pay back Government debt" >> >> Do you think the Liberals would have let Australia slip into a full >> recession by not stimulating the economy? >> >>> Dudd arrived into office with a surplus, all gone, and >>> more,.......LOTS MORE..... >> >> Do the letters GFC mean anything to you? > > They don't to the rest of the world. They may not to your world, but that really just shows how out of touch with reality you are.
From: Doug Jewell on 12 Aug 2010 04:41
Clocky wrote: > "PaulpULVITZKA" <pulvitzka(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:f6b26270-3de9-4fd2-990a-ca2dd886f0bd(a)k1g2000prl.googlegroups.com... >> "Labor is borrowing $100 million a day to pay back Government debt" > > Do you think the Liberals would have let Australia slip into a full > recession by not stimulating the economy? They most likely would have stimulated the economy, but would have done it for a lot less money than Labor. Or _if_ the Libs spent as much as labor it would have had a much greater benefit. Targetted infrastructure construction would have done a much better job of stimulating the economy than the plasma TV bonus, spending $800,000 on $100,000 classrooms, and the pink-batt stuff-up. For that matter, if things did go belly up into a full-blown recession and we hit 10% unemployment, it would have been cheaper to pay the unemployed $35k/year for 2 years, than the Labor stimulus. Such spending would have still had an equivalent stimulus effect anyway. What labor did was waste. Pure and simple. > >> Dudd arrived into office with a surplus, all gone, and >> more,.......LOTS MORE..... > > Do the letters GFC mean anything to you? Wasn't it better to spend money, > save jobs and prevent going into recession whilst the economies of countries > like the UK and the US and rest of Europe were going down the tube? > There were fuckups along the way, sure, but things could have turned out a > lot worse too. We were never ever going to come close to what happened in US & Europe. For starters the closer regulation of our finance industry meant that we didn't have the level of sub-prime lending. Our #2 export industry, agriculture depends more on the weather than anything else, and we had a good season, hence good agricultural sales. Our #1 export industry, mining, did take a bit of a hit. But the hit it took only put it back a couple of years. People still need food and still need energy, so we weren't in a lot of trouble. If nothing was done at all, yes we would have had _slight_ negative growth for somewhere between 3 and 6 quarters. Yes we would have had a bit of a jump in unemployment. But we wouldn't have been hit hard. The amount Labor wasted was totally disproportionate to the problem. Remember that during their time, the libs were faced with the collapse of the asian economies - our biggest trading partners. That had a greater potential impact on us than the US & EU financial collapse. We got through that without needing massive stimulus handouts. > > > -- What is the difference between a duck? |