Political Crossfire Forums

[Kindred]

The gloves have come off now, and it’s all too obvious for those who pay attention.

Howard’s attack on universities, increasing fees, increasing full paying students, abolishing student unions, coupled with Howard’s war on workers, giving employers more power (as if the needed it). Add this with tax cuts for the rich, and crumbs for the poor and you have a potent cocktail.


Is Howard trying to create a two tier society in Australia?

[Snow Patrol]

Yes, almost everything i've ever heard about the man leads me to conclude he is an utter knobhead. He ablolished student unions? That's pretty authoritarian, how the f**k did he win a fourth term?

[anselfir]

well as with all wars there is an offense and a defense, this may be an offensive but given the general defensive position of conservatism, this is an counteroffensive. so i see nothing wrong iwth it

[Nico]

A.D wrote: The gloves have come off now, and it’s all too obvious for those who pay attention.

Howard’s attack on universities, increasing fees, increasing full paying students, abolishing student unions.....

It'll bite him on the butt. NZ increased student fees a few years back and all that happened was increased student debt, and the loss of the brightest of them to overseas companies and universities, i.e the economy lost the benefit of actually having these people once they were trained. The only thing that has been bringing them back is the recent reduction in interest repayments. as far as I'm concerned it was an uneccessary demonstration of a money-go-round, with the NZ based professional sectors being the big loosers [the winners of course being the multinationals who soaked the graduates up like a handytowel] .

[Eternal]

A.D wrote: The gloves have come off now, and it’s all too obvious for those who pay attention.

Howard’s attack on universities, increasing fees, increasing full paying students, abolishing student unions, coupled with Howard’s war on workers, giving employers more power (as if the needed it). Add this with tax cuts for the rich, and crumbs for the poor and you have a potent cocktail.


Is Howard trying to create a two tier society in Australia?

I'm interested in the storm that's brewing over the governments proposed industrial relations reforms, especially now that the government has the numbers in both houses of parliament. Combine this with the divide that already exists within the government regarding the sale of Telstra, leadership tensions, Iraq war, detention of asylum seekers, East Timor oil treaty etc and I think it's fair to say that many of the governments ill advised policies are coming home to roost.

Just a shame we don't have a decent opposition.

Cheers, Eternal

[Lord Hargreaves]

Good job John Howard, stay firm in the face of socialism :tu:

[Nico]

Well it would be a shame for him to make the same mistakes that nearly ruined my country. He's not facing down 'socialism' [the catchphrase], but his own society, there's a big difference. The only thing that dragged NZ out of the ditch, seeing as we were the doyens of conservative social experimenting [as well as the welffare state] was the realisation that the two schools of thought are complementary, not mutually exclusive. Cold social darwanism as espoused by the right, made living a grey experience, I'm glad we ditched it as an imperative. The middle is a much warmer place.

[Eternal]

Anaximander wrote: Well it would be a shame for him to make the same mistakes that nearly ruined my country. He's not facing down 'socialism' [the catchphrase], but his own society, there's a big difference. The only thing that dragged NZ out of the ditch, seeing as we were the doyens of conservative social experimenting [as well as the welffare state] was the realisation that the two schools of thought are complementary, not mutually exclusive. Cold social darwanism as espoused by the right, made living a grey experience, I'm glad we ditched it as an imperative. The middle is a much warmer place.

I agree. Ultimately it's about striking the right balance between socialism and capitalism on top of understanding that each country is different. Just because an economic policy works well in one country doesn't mean it will work well in another.


Cheers, Eternal

[maxtsu]

JH has being in too long.
That length of time in office starts to go to the head. He is starting to run roughshot over everyone.

[Kindred]

Eternal wrote: A.D wrote: The gloves have come off now, and it’s all too obvious for those who pay attention.

Howard’s attack on universities, increasing fees, increasing full paying students, abolishing student unions, coupled with Howard’s war on workers, giving employers more power (as if the needed it). Add this with tax cuts for the rich, and crumbs for the poor and you have a potent cocktail.


Is Howard trying to create a two tier society in Australia?

I'm interested in the storm that's brewing over the governments proposed industrial relations reforms, especially now that the government has the numbers in both houses of parliament. Combine this with the divide that already exists within the government regarding the sale of Telstra, leadership tensions, Iraq war, detention of asylum seekers, East Timor oil treaty etc and I think it's fair to say that many of the governments ill advised policies are coming home to roost.

Just a shame we don't have a decent opposition.

Cheers, Eternal

Honestly, the list of disgusting things this man has done is so long, and growing by the day. The East Timor thing really gets to me, its blatant bullying.
I’m glad the unions have mobilized though, and the proving to be a forced to be reckoned with, and I’ll join them in every rally they organize.

You’re right though, we don’t have a decent opposition. Labour has lost its passion, it’s no longer the workers party, it basically the liberal party but fractionally to the left.

I actually didn’t mind Latham, his forest policy was okay, in fact I preferred (I wouldn’t say liked) most of his policies.

Btw Lord Hargreaves, Howard isn’t fighting socialism, he’s fighting working families.

[eynon]

Anaximander wrote: A.D wrote: The gloves have come off now, and it’s all too obvious for those who pay attention.

Howard’s attack on universities, increasing fees, increasing full paying students, abolishing student unions.....

It'll bite him on the butt. NZ increased student fees a few years back and all that happened was increased student debt, and the loss of the brightest of them to overseas companies and universities, i.e the economy lost the benefit of actually having these people once they were trained. The only thing that has been bringing them back is the recent reduction in interest repayments. as far as I'm concerned it was an uneccessary demonstration of a money-go-round, with the NZ based professional sectors being the big loosers [the winners of course being the multinationals who soaked the graduates up like a handytowel] .

did some-one say student debt? 37,000(USD) and counting...and I just got home....course it's something I gotta do, things being as insanley competative as they are in the states.

Don't worry about it TOO much, those of us who do not belong to the upper class will just have to suck it up and take the debt. We may not have the same line of credit the rich-kids will have, but we want it more, so we'll win in the end :twisted:

[eynon]

A.D wrote: Eternal wrote: A.D wrote: The gloves have come off now, and it’s all too obvious for those who pay attention.

Howard’s attack on universities, increasing fees, increasing full paying students, abolishing student unions, coupled with Howard’s war on workers, giving employers more power (as if the needed it). Add this with tax cuts for the rich, and crumbs for the poor and you have a potent cocktail.


Is Howard trying to create a two tier society in Australia?

I'm interested in the storm that's brewing over the governments proposed industrial relations reforms, especially now that the government has the numbers in both houses of parliament. Combine this with the divide that already exists within the government regarding the sale of Telstra, leadership tensions, Iraq war, detention of asylum seekers, East Timor oil treaty etc and I think it's fair to say that many of the governments ill advised policies are coming home to roost.

Just a shame we don't have a decent opposition.

Cheers, Eternal

Honestly, the list of disgusting things this man has done is so long, and growing by the day. The East Timor thing really gets to me, its blatant bullying.
I’m glad the unions have mobilized though, and the proving to be a forced to be reckoned with, and I’ll join them in every rally they organize.

You’re right though, we don’t have a decent opposition. Labour has lost its passion, it’s no longer the workers party, it basically the liberal party but fractionally to the left.

I actually didn’t mind Latham, his forest policy was okay, in fact I preferred (I wouldn’t say liked) most of his policies.

Btw Lord Hargreaves, Howard isn’t fighting socialism, he’s fighting working families.

:lol: :lol: :lol: why does this sound soooooo familair?

[Antiloop]

Honestly, I haven't seen a better candidate for Prime Minister since Howard took office....

[social]

oneofthem wrote: well as with all wars there is an offense and a defense, this may be an offensive but given the general defensive position of conservatism, this is an counteroffensive. so i see nothing wrong iwth it

What are you going on about?

[social]

Antiloop wrote: Honestly, I haven't seen a better candidate for Prime Minister since Howard took office....

Care to explian why?

[watermelon]

Howard may now have the control of both houses, however it remains to be seen if the changes Howard wants to make are constitutionally allowable. This is expressly the case when it comes to the work place relations, with the constitution enshrining the independence of the states to decide upon matters regarding their labour forces. Howard wants to override the States independence and bring in a national system, and this raises the question: are these constitutional changes at all possible without a referendum?

[watermelon]

social wrote: Antiloop wrote: Honestly, I haven't seen a better candidate for Prime Minister since Howard took office....

Care to explian why?

Though I hate to agree there has been little chance of Labor gaining control when they are so conserned about who will lead the next leadership challege. and although the Greens are the only real oppersition party there is little chance at this point of them gaining power at the next ballet...but we can try!

[ToonArmyIsComing]

Post secondary education is one of the areas that I think the government needs to invest in. In a globalized world, the country will fall behind in terms of productivity if the brightest minds are not given an opportunity to be educated.

[euro]

The fact that Howard is now trying to push a conservative agenda into a system that requires no such intervention (workplace relations, universities) instead of simply running the country, shows that maybe its time for a labour government to be inacted. Australian politics has always been a balancing act, as of late it has shifted too much into the conservative direction.

[Kazac]

watermelon wrote: Howard may now have the control of both houses, however it remains to be seen if the changes Howard wants to make are constitutionally allowable. This is expressly the case when it comes to the work place relations, with the constitution enshrining the independence of the states to decide upon matters regarding their labour forces. Howard wants to override the States independence and bring in a national system, and this raises the question: are these constitutional changes at all possible without a referendum?

Well he is using the corporations power to enact the legislation, so it will not effect state government workers (or people who do not work for a corporation).

Plus, I think there is almost zero chance of the laws being overturned in in the High Court. The Court is currently packed with formalists, and it is pretty much settled law that the governmental immunities doctrine really only applies if the laws effectively cripple the states' power to act as governments. It would be a near impossible sell to make that argument in this case.