www.robowars.org

RoboWars Australia Forum Index -> Off-Topic

Rudd
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Post new topic   Reply to topic
  Author    Thread
seanet1310



Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 1265
Location: Adelaide


 Reply with quote  

quote:
Originally posted by Philip:

It is so sad to see people losing their jobs because of dreadful decisions by the current federal government. (Just read about Daniel.) Their own predictions are for more people to lose their jobs. Their forecasts got revised to be far worse after ten weeks last time.



The job market will forever fluctuate.

Lets look at the graphs from last month http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-11/unemployment-figures-for-june/4813876
Now Howard was elected in 1996. AS you can see, the Liberals presided over a long period of unemployment rates higher then current.
You can not just blame Howard for this, just like you can not just blame Rudd for the current situation. The economy is restructuring and with that comes losses and gains.

It sucks for Daniel and all the others who have lost their job (Ajax was talking about all the troubles he has been having at the recent event) but just how would have Abbott done better? Based on his limited costed policies beyond criticism, I am not convinced he would have done much better (about equal to a very slight lead for Abbott but there is no way to test this).

Just to show the flip side, if Abbott gets in then my job will be at risk based on everything he has said about my work (including using false statistics a long while back to try to justify it.)

Got to see both sides of the coin.

quote:
Originally posted by Philip:


The hidden jobless are the casuals who technically have jobs but just don't get enough hours to make ends meet.
.

There are always people who want more work. Some figures take this into account.
_________________
Remember to trust me, I am an Engineer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rp8hvyjZWHs

Post Fri Aug 09, 2013 10:00 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Philip
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 3821
Location: Queensland near Brisbane


 Reply with quote  


quote:
... if Abbott gets in then my job will be at risk based on everything he has said about my work ...
I don't want you to lose your job either. I can understand why you would want job security and pay rises every year. I would like that too. But I work in the private sector where you cut spending when income drops. I know my job could disappear at any time.
_________________
So even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and our river systems

Post Sun Aug 11, 2013 4:13 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
seanet1310



Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 1265
Location: Adelaide


 Reply with quote  

I just mentioned it as there are always two sides to everything.

What makes you think employment will be significantly better off under a Coalition government compared to the ALP?
_________________
Remember to trust me, I am an Engineer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rp8hvyjZWHs

Post Sun Aug 11, 2013 9:04 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Philip
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 3821
Location: Queensland near Brisbane


 Reply with quote  

Did you see the graph in your above link? Labor left disastrous unemployment followed by a steady improvement by Howard. Labor gets in and things turn to poo. I know that some people think it is just a wild coincidence that every time Labor is in power everything goes bad.

Don't get me wrong. Keating did a lot of good in the early days of Labor.
_________________
So even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and our river systems

Post Sun Aug 11, 2013 10:47 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
seanet1310



Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 1265
Location: Adelaide


 Reply with quote  

There has been quite a few chances in the LNP from the last time Howard lead. He also had a good time towards the end.

I personally don't think you can draw the conclusion the increase is purely from the lack of liberals leading.

Early 2000's under Howard also had quite an increase.

FYI, I am not pro Labor, and it is highly unlikely I will vote for my local Labor member because I base my vote partly on the local member as this is the purpose of our political system. She has done little for the local electorate and has not been a good minister of her portfolios.
As for the senate, I vote below the line and I suspect I will have Labor above the LNP to help keep the LNP in check (Labor will be in check if they win house of reps by the current nature of the senate )
_________________
Remember to trust me, I am an Engineer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rp8hvyjZWHs

Post Sun Aug 11, 2013 1:11 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Philip
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 3821
Location: Queensland near Brisbane


 Reply with quote  


quote:
I personally don't think you can draw the conclusion the increase is purely from the lack of liberals leading.
True. If it was just once, you might think it was just a coincidence. But, when we see a repeated pattern of poor economic performance under successive Labor governments, we are entitled to ask if it is more than a coincidence.

For example, QLD was in a strong financial position before Labor came to power at a state level. At the same time as the Liberals were delivering strong economic growth at a federal level, state Labor ran QLD into the ground. QLD had the mining boom and still lost our AAA credit rating.
quote:
Early 2000's under Howard also had quite an increase.
Yes. The September 11 attacks had an impact.
_________________
So even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and our river systems

Post Mon Aug 12, 2013 5:10 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
miles&Jules
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 19 May 2010
Posts: 3941
Location: ipswich QLD


 Reply with quote  

We do have one of the best economies in the world, with a small deficit relatively speaking.

Oz didn't go into recession after the GFC (the thing conservatives hate to mention) ....we may have, if liberals were in, and picked austerity over stimulus. Like what happened in the depression of the 1930's Very Happy
_________________
Miles Blow - Julie Pitts
www.mulesfilm.com.au
www.wombokforest.com.au

-Pickasso- Vivid Sportsman champion 2015

Post Wed Aug 14, 2013 11:22 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Philip
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 3821
Location: Queensland near Brisbane


 Reply with quote  

I feel sorry for Rudd. One moment his party is saying that he is the best person to lead them, the next moment they don't even want him in parliament. They knew exactly what he was like before they elected him for the second time. He should be given a measure of respect for the number of MPs who held their seats. The same seats that were in danger of being lost if not for his return. He already did the right thing and resigned his leadership. Give the man some respect.
_________________
So even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and our river systems

Post Sat Sep 14, 2013 7:32 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
Philip
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 3821
Location: Queensland near Brisbane


 Reply with quote  

Unbelievably, they were talking of another carbon tax tonight. The carbon tax is being called a price on carbon. Aren't our electricity prices too high now? How many manufacturing jobs do they want us to loose?

The Paris Agreement calls on the world to spend 2.5 trillion dollars to decrease the temperature by 0.2 degrees. Could you imagine the good that money could do for people?
_________________
So even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and our river systems

Post Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:48 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message
Nick
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 11576
Location: Sydney, NSW


 Reply with quote  

No amount of money will help people underwater. Better to spend some money now than try to have coastal cities flooded, desertification, wilder weather and famines later on.
_________________
Australian 2015 Featherweight champion
UK 2016 Gladiator champion

Post Thu Jun 08, 2017 9:57 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message
Valen
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 4419
Location: Sydney


 Reply with quote  

Carbon price earnt the government money and reduced carbon emissions.
"Direct action" cost's money and gives it direct to big business to do basically nothing.

2.5T is a drop in the bucket globally. I mean its what 4 years of american military spending? 100 years of just the Australian defense budget. Less than 2 years of the global military budget (1.6T)

All those people you want to think of need to eat, need to live somewhere, need to live in a world without massive regular storms. Insurance companies and the US military both view climate change as a direct threat to profits and security respectively (hopefully). You think Syria having an exodus is causing problems, wait until you kids are grown up and all of a sudden a few hundred million people living in coastal areas are all forced out by rising sea levels.
_________________
Mechanical engineers build weapons, civil engineers build targets

Post Fri Jun 09, 2017 9:29 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger ICQ Number
Ondray



Joined: 06 Jul 2015
Posts: 112
Location: Newcastle


 Reply with quote  

Australian power prices are going up because of bad decisions by power companies. Nothing to do with the Paris agreement. We are paying for a bunch of infrastructure installed for an expected increase in consumption that didn't happen.

Coal and Gas prices will also effect the power price more than a carbon tax.

The sooner we get our grid on to renewables the sooner we can breath a sigh of relief as the power price will stabilize and possibly go down in the long run. A carbon tax will incentivize this.

Sometime in the next decade will will hit 'peak supply' of fossil fuels, the point at which supply can no longer keep up with demand. At that point prices will skyrocket. Any person or country still dependent on fossil fuels at that point will be financially ruined.

That's just the local economic arguments in favor before we start talk to about the environmental cost.

Plus incentivizing new technology makes jobs and industrial growth:
http://reneweconomy.com.au/solar-industry-provides-far-more-jobs-in-australia-than-coal-69251/

Not acting is small short term gain, for a massive long term loss.

Post Sat Jun 10, 2017 12:49 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
Ondray



Joined: 06 Jul 2015
Posts: 112
Location: Newcastle


 Reply with quote  

But I will say, as a person working in renewables research I'm far less worried about sea level rise than food security. Food supply growth isn't keeping up with population growth as it is, when the climate change really hits it will most likely reduce global food supply.

Edit: On the plus side, if we get the solar panels I'm working on going we could see a 10x reduction in panel costs! No government incentive or Paris agreement needed, renewables will just be way cheaper.

Post Sat Jun 10, 2017 12:52 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
Valen
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 4419
Location: Sydney


 Reply with quote  

I'm all for renewable energy but without grid scale storage it's only half the answer. I reckon the govt should build nukes to operate base load. Directly built and operated by the government, out in the middle of nowhere. Keep building renewables as well, price the power to encourage that. Then when either fusion, grid scale storage or just oversupply of renewable + electricity grid transport capacity makes it feasible you can turn them off. If that happens 2 years after the nukes are built call it a win and have a big switch off ceremony.

(That's why they need to be govt owned, if its private they will lobby against renewable and or fusion etc.)
_________________
Mechanical engineers build weapons, civil engineers build targets

Post Sat Jun 10, 2017 10:15 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger ICQ Number
  Display posts from previous:      

Forum Jump:
Jump to:  

Post new topic   Reply to topic
Page 4 of 4

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

Last Thread | Next Thread  >
Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
millenniumFalcon Template By Vereor.