TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Australia
-- Election time again
Pages (6): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 »

Adnan we both would pay her hecs if it was abolished. University students protest hecs going up constantly and it really frustrates me.

Adnan I want to be a a professional dj/producer eventually, the government in no way offers me any assistance to do so, the tax you will eventually pay does not aid me to do so. There is no system where my equipment is paid for unitl i earn money from my chosen vocation. To do the work I "want" to do, i must save from work i hate!! See where I'm getting?

I really don't mind being a part of the bigger picture with tax etc but I hate it when students scream murder when they find out less of my tax money is supporting them when it's not even supporting me.

Imagine if i asked you to buy me a couple of records every week then you stop and i say "thats not fair"!! Would that piss you off? What if i than held a protest blocking your public transport home after a long day of work because of it? Trust me, it is really annoying..

I'm sympathetic to student life,as I said i share in one, If university offered a course that suited my chosen career path i would do it. But Understand you choose University so that you may work in a field of your choice, have better employment prospects or for personal interest, We don't make you, so why would you have a "right" to complain to those of us paying a shitload in tax, when hecs changes. ( nothiing personal mate, just saying in general)

I don't want to get into a debate about what tax should be spent on, because that is not my point, i'm just discussing hecs.

quote:

Originally posted by Adnan1999'ing yes that is if you defer HECS, which means you will be paying it off with Interest.

actually all HECS debts are interest free, the only reason you sometimes have to pay more than the original cost of your course is because at the beginning of each financial year your HECS debt is indexed such that it maintains a realistic value in relation to the current cost of living.

for those interested, it went up 2.4% in 2003, and 2.4% again in 2004

quote:

Originally posted by batemanscott Adnan we both would pay her hecs if it was abolished. University students protest hecs going up constantly and it really frustrates me. Adnan I want to be a a professional dj/producer eventually, the government in no way offers me any assistance to do so, the tax you will eventually pay does not aid me to do so. There is no system where my equipment is paid for unitl i earn money from my chosen vocation. To do the work I "want" to do, i must save from work i hate!! See where I'm getting? I really don't mind being a part of the bigger picture with tax etc but I hate it when students scream murder when they find out less of my tax money is supporting them when it's not even supporting me. Imagine if i asked you to buy me a couple of records every week then you stop and i say "thats not fair"!! Would that piss you off? What if i than held a protest blocking your public transport home after a long day of work because of it? Trust me, it is really annoying.. I'm sympathetic to student life,as I said i share in one, If university offered a course that suited my chosen career path i would do it. But Understand you choose University so that you may work in a field of your choice, have better employment prospects or for personal interest, We don't make you, so why would you have a "right" to complain to those of us paying a shitload in tax, when hecs changes. ( nothiing personal mate, just saying in general) I don't want to get into a debate about what tax should be spent on, because that is not my point, i'm just discussing hecs.

What you said is all well and grand.

But, think about this. -
According to the principles of a democracy the taxpayer's money should be spent on the common good - education and the right to eduation is one of those common goods. Sure you may not need HECS because you have chosen a different career in life, but the fact of the matter is you do not represent the majority. Also, do you not rely on people who are university graduates? Who do you think is responsible for the infastructure, management and other day to day things you take for granted. Do you think by lowering tertiary standards by privatising university education, completely will improve our quality of life by the few extra dollars a week you will get in the form of a tax cut? - in the long-term, no.

Furthermore I think there are more "taxpayers" out there who have, or plan to complete tertiary education than people seeking other careers - i.e dj-ing (current statistics show that 70% of high school students seek to enter tertiary institutions - according the the Bureau of Statistics). Keep in mind, not all of these students, can afford full-fee tertiary education even by working. So what your saying is to them "tough luck, you cannot complete your tertiary studies".

So if in a democracy the tax collected should represent the "majority" of society then the majority being tertiary education students (be it TAFE or University) - should entail in HECS remaining for the betterment of the 'majority' of society, not for Howard's mounting post-iraq reconstruction bills.

adnan your still missing my point completely.

I reckon in a civilised country education is a right, not a privelidge.
Interest rates are gunna go up in the next 4 years no matter what.

Latham aint bright
Howard lies flat out to your face!
The greens have no show, I find their E stance quite funny
the democrats are weak

no one wins a political debate...

Im gunna make my vote count - donkey vote

^ agreed

my view on education;

its much more than a personal choice, its for the good of the country.
the more educated people we have, the more the nation can progress, the more overall benefits we all receive. newer technologies, discoveries, social schemes etc all aid the country in the long run.

i think the government should contribute lots more to the educational institutes (well universities in particular - tafe doesnt do much cept get a job for yourself).

and yer, uni isnt all about a job either, its about pursuit of knowledge and understanding. and anyway, i dont know why im been nice to uni atm, cos its not been nice to me. stuck home on a sat doing about 4 things all due in the next few days. and i dont know how to use excel :/ and im paying for this. pants.

finally, people talking some sense around here!! well said gumble.
couldn't have put it any better.

This is just one of the examples why the liberals do not understand what is good for the country in the long-run.

mate, i always talk sense


im normally a liberal voter tho haha

but yer, dont think so this election.

Greens get my vote

Then Labour

FUCK JOHN HOWARD................sorry couldn't help myself

did anyone see the live debate just then?

howard did worse than i thought he would.

Howard 33% Latham 67%

Interesting debate last night, good to watch Howard squirm for a change

I think the debate really showed Howard as he truly is. Tired, old, lacking enthusiasm, running out of new ideas. He's lied so many times, it's all starting to come back to him and not a moment too soon. Watching the debate last night was like watching a man get painted into a corner.

I just can't understand how people can believe him, or even take him seriously.

Not that I'm suggesting any other politician is markedly different. I've always maintained that no matter who we vote for, a politician will be elected. With that in mind though, I think Latham will be a good change for Australia. Something different from the nasty, divisive politics we've come to expect from Howard. In 20 years time I think we'll look back on the last few years with sad regret.

Agreed.

I thought Mark Latham performed very well in the debate. There were a couple of instances where he wasn't really decisive (taxes mainly) but he was very strong on education, health and national security (surprisingly!).

I though he was right on the money when he said "Australia's interests lie in our own region and we will be concentrating on security in our own country and south-east asia first"
--->paraphrasing.

The thing that was quite clear to me was the clear divide between Labor and the coalition. Kim Beasley really didn't provide a good alternative to Howard last election in terms of different policies and different ideas, but i think Mark Latham is definitely trying some new things this time around.

* Scrapping 25% increase in HECS
* Putting in measures to increases the bulk billing rate. My mother is a GP, so she has had long conversations with me on this issue and she strongly believes that it is the way to go. I am inclined to agree with her as she has far more experience than me
* Tax breaks for middle-income families
* Superannuation policy which was accepted by Howard in parliament

My mind was made up long before the election was announced, but i am still taking a strong interest in the campaign.

quote:

Originally posted by webmeister In 20 years time I think we'll look back on the last few years with sad regret.

Far from regret, more with gratitude... What howard is doing now is in the best interest of the Majority of Australia...Key word being majority. You cant expect him to please the minority. And the next election will prove that it has been the majority that he has been making the decisions for

nah i think howard will win because Australia wants a strong leader at present. We dont want radical change, times are too uncertain. Howard hasnt acted in the interests of a lot of people, especially with the whole Iraq thing. I cant beleive how much of a non-issue it really is for people. Its the whole reason i cant vote liberal this election.

But I think people will ignore that and vote liberal, just cos its too uncertain to vote in someone like Latham.

Normally it would be easy, i'd walk in an tick liberal - but im screwed as to waht to do this election.

I'm no fan of johnny but how can you be happy with what latham delivered?

Every question was answered with a " we have a good plan and some good strategies" answer. I couldn't believe what I was hearing, he didn't even answer alot of the questions.

I heard Neil Mitchell this morning saying that the whole thing was a joke because by labours demand, once a question was asked it could not be pushed further. So when Mark or Johnny dodged answers they couldn't insist on a direct answer.

Let's face facts, it's a lot easier to say, "we wouldn't do that" then to be the people responsible for making decisions.

I'm almost keen to vote labour just to see how funny it will be when they run the country in it's current social climate internationally.

I'm keen to see latham kiss bush's arse like any australian prime minister has always done and will always do. It's all good to talk tough but when 20 million people depend on a rock solid relationship with the biggest economic/ military/ democratic country in the world, you better hope you have real pretty lips!

Liberals policies are pretty pathetic though so maybe i might just get to watch the above... Either way we are screwed

I thought he outlined strategies for:

* Health, particularly Medicare - plan already announced
* Education - Labor's plan hs already been anounced
* National Security - gave us an idea of the direction that he would go if he won government. More of a focus on domestic and regional security
* Economy/taxes - planned tax breaks for middle-income families etc, this has just been anounced in the past week or two i think.

You can hardly deliver and discuss detailed strategies in a half an hour debate (or was it an hour?) Anyway........

I thought he did a good job of outlining their strategies. I really do think Latham is trying something different this time. I don't understand how people can say that he doesn't have any real ideas/plans, when he has announced all these different plans for education, economy etc recently.

Wasn't it Mark Latham's idea about reforms to parliament superannuation that John Howard agreed to and then passed?


P.S. HOWARD.....
* War on Iraq & Weapons of Mass Destruction (hmm...where are they?)
* Children Overboard
* Failure to ratify Kyoto Protocol, despite ever-growing environmental threats
* Sale of Telstra
* Raising HECS by 25% and increasing full-fee places to 25%
* Ethanol debacle with Manildra & Howard's brother
* and there are many more i have forgotten....

AUSTRALIANS HAVE SHORT MEMORIES

Lil Johnny

I dunno what lathams policies are, and what he says always seems to be changing. At least with johnny i know exactly whats gonna happen. Plus i reckon the country has only got stronger over the last 8 years or so. We are actually a strong country compared to the labour debt days.

*Note: Just like to add I dont particularly like either of them, I just prefer the lib government as a whole. Probably because I go to a private school, and im a capitalist pig

quote:

Originally posted by Paulie Far from regret, more with gratitude... What howard is doing now is in the best interest of the Majority of Australia...Key word being majority. You cant expect him to please the minority. And the next election will prove that it has been the majority that he has been making the decisions for

I don't understand how 25% increases in HECS, more funding for rich private schools at the expense of cash-strapped public schools, destabilising Medicare, wasted resources on a failed conquest of a Middle Eastern country when the real threat is obviously much closer to home, enshrining discrimination in law (gay marriage etc), tax breaks for rich people or making Australia more at risk of terrorist attack benefits the majority of Australians.

Please explain this to me

quote:

Originally posted by Paulie /me waits for pro labour bragi and webmeister to feed us their propoganda.

Thanks for the pidgeon holing It's cozy here in my little corner, so why don't you get out of your BMW^H^H^HNorth Shore Holden and join us for a fire-side sing-a-long, where all us pinko-lefties are free

Shall we play point by point, or go for the long-ass posts that noone reads?

First point: At any stage, were more than 50% of the population FOR the war in IRAQ? [where's the majority then?]

quote:

Originally posted by bragi Thanks for the pidgeon holing It's cozy here in my little corner, so why don't you get out of your BMW^H^H^HNorth Shore Holden and join us for a fire-side sing-a-long, where all us pinko-lefties are free Shall we play point by point, or go for the long-ass posts that noone reads? First point: At any stage, were more than 50% of the population FOR the war in IRAQ? [where's the majority then?]

At which stage wasnt it?

Im going to vote for the liberals for sure. I wouldnt take too much notice of that debate because howard always gets beaten in those things but wins the elections. i wouldnt read too much into that stupid thing anyway. Funny thing was latham may have won based upon some randoms who "apparently" were undecided (not likely), but all the phone in polls put howard ahead 65% and that was with 55,000 phone in callers, not some bums sitting in a studio pressing buttons for fun.

There is no way i want someone running this country the way latham speaks, his somewhat violent past and his front bench have no idea what the hell is going on. You just need to watch one session of question time to see the libs have it all over them.

I didnt watch much of the debate but i dont think i heard either one answer any question with a straight answer. They just seemed to repeat the same thing over and over and confuse people by going round in circles around specific details about policies etc.

One thing i took away was this. Latham is trying too hard to appeal to everyone and make himself out to be true blue, aussie bush tucker mate. Offering tax cuts across the board. Thats the oldest trick in the book so whats new. Labour is known for creating high interest rates when in power, so like latham pointed out many people have big debts to pay off so they are going to ease the pressure by offering tax cuts, hence more money for the struggling family BUT...interest rates go up, the more money those struggling families have to pay in interest on there morgages so the tax cuts account for nothing in the end.

But then again i read today that the greens wanted to legalize recreational drug use so i might vote for them then

Bragi & webmeister, if stoners like yourself ran this country we would be no better off than Trinidad and Tobacco


You cant expect to give things to people on a platter you gotta work for it Thats the problem with todays world, they think the people that are well off are just lucky. They dont believe that they worked their arses off to get where they are now. Dont they also deserve a break?

quote:

Originally posted by matt_a *Note: Just like to add I dont particularly like either of them, I just prefer the lib government as a whole. Probably because I go to a private school, and im a capitalist pig

If you're into neo-liberal economic policy, then why vote for Howard? Latham is actually more fiscally conservative than Howard when it comes to economic policy -- hell; he recently got into a stoush with ACOSS over welfare. When was the last time you heard a Labor leader attacking a body like that because they're 'pro-welfare'.

Myself, I�ll be voting for Greens the with Labor second and Howard last -- essentially because I agree with everything Bob Brown says and disagree with everything the Liberals do (War in Iraq, refugees, bad economic management, obsession with the US at the expense of our own region, funding of wealthy private schools at the expense of struggling non-government and government schools, HECS fees to name a but a few).

quote:

Originally posted by Paulie At which stage wasnt it?

Nearly every stage? That aside, in a sense it's irrelevant whether most were in favor of it -- it was still a misguided mistake.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.