Turnbull rolls over "again" to the ultra right

What worries me about political debates in a 2 party preferred system is that people get drawn into a divisive stance on all areas of the debate along the lines of left and right. Surely there is common ground, surely one person cannot support a parties policies in totalle, but what you see is people defending "their" side of politics regardless. I read quite a lot of comments sections from the SMH, ABC, SBS and whenever political questions arise the debate degenerates into an us vs them and often a slinging match with no real discussion of the topic at hand. I dont think that this has done anything to improve the level of understanding and I find it much more constructive when a debate can proceed along the lines of discussion that this one has. I dont identify with either side of politics, nor the Greens, they simply dont apply themselves to the job at hand as I would expect from a political party and as Ive mentioned much of this has to do with the influence of business interests IMO.

Hear hear Silicun ... I agree with your second post entirely, political debate (and most debates to be honest, e.g. sharks here in WA lately) is now highly polarised and its the worse for it.

We're nowhere near as bad as the States and I hope we never get there ... ultimately governing a country will always involve hard choices (In Obama's Wars he speaks of how nothing easy ever lands on his desk, if its easy then it gets done before it reaches his office) and trade offs, how we decide as a country where the priorities lie is where debate should take place. Not sure what the catalyst will be to try and promote partisan politics (almost always requires a crisis of some sort) but we are crying out for some real statesmanship in this country.

On you other point, price is the largest influence over demand but not the only one ... and here's where we start to get deeper into marketing theory. Where goods are largely comparable in quality (e.g. Western & Japanese cars today) then price has more of an influence ... a certain level of product quality is a hygiene factor, eg high ANCAP ratings are now a pre-requisite for many new car purchasers so the Japanese cars are fine, Chinese less so (Geely, Great Wall etc). They're still where the Toyotas were in the 70s, perceived lower quality and lower price.

Lots of exceptions to this of course, e.g. luxury goods makers clearly adopt a different pricing structure - balancing trying to max volumes without losing exclusivity (hence artifically high prices).

Robust debate is great and there will not be bi-partisan politics on every issue, what is important to emphasise is the quality of the debate and the quality of the information. There is no value having a debate which is influenced by inaccurate "facts" and down right lies presented as truths any more than there is having a slinging match. Too often we see a government/industry persuade the public that a tax or some piece of policy or some group is going to do such and such damage using completely unsubstantiated claims put forward in a way to appeal to some human sensibility and this is a dangerous thing. In light of this I think that the media must be freed from bias of ownership/monopolies and people who want to speak out (whistleblowers so to speak) need greater protections. To my delight the access to information is/has changed and until the internet is censored or more mainstreamed than it is (see google/facebook etc) then it is difficult to control the dispersal of information.

People need to regain the power of personal choice and personal responsibility. Being in a position where you have a good understanding of whats going on enables that, by mainstreaming media, tabloiding information most people become lost in the superficial and thats where governance seems today. Even in a crisis government will seek to appeal to the lowest common denominator in an effort to push an agenda, its self serving and its the easy way out.

"People need to regain the power of personal choice and personal responsibility"......the whole of a modern consumerist society conspires against that with cradle to grave marketing devastatingly efficient at manipulating desires and manufacturing wants.

Thats why it's psychologically irrelevant to even speak of freedom of choice. Even the savviest are susceptible to the power of unrelenting suggestion.
This is well proven fact by now.

What has been created by the late western capitalist machine are well trained sheep ...addicted to the treats and sugar fixes of the mass market.

Anyone who has kids will testify to the power and omnipotence of modern marketing messages.

Social media, far from making facts more deliverable to the masses , has only increased exponentially the power of marketing to the masses and the spread of mis-information and hype.

freeride, I hear ya, I battle every time I see my little girl with the macca's thing. her mum allows her to eat macca's and she is totally addicted to the food and to the marketing. i refuse to let her eat it but what a battle!!! drive anywhere from my home and there is the golden arches every 3-5 km and her screaming from the backseat macca's, macca's dad can we get a happy meal dad more often than not it ends up in tears, honestly it is relentless and its not normal behaviour for a child.

I do have trouble positioning myself outside the manipulation but with constant affirmation i manage to do so as do other pockets of society and IMO there is a growing number of the population that are on this path. It is difficult, everyday I have to face the of the notion that if you aint spending the bucks your a lowlife.

Silicun, for an industry the size of ours the workforce does need to be inexpensive to compensate for inefficiencies that come with a lack of scale. The Germans thrive on manu because they went at it whole hog and bet the house on it. Also, they timed it with a period where they had slave labour at their disposal in its inception. Look at any industrialised (or even emerging) country. Its initial success is almost entirely founded on cheap (slave) labour. America, China, Brazil, Japan, South Africa etc etc. The Germans (and the Japs and to some extent the Chinese) have been at a point for a while that that the scale has allowed for refinement in production methods and logistics to absorb wage growth that must follow. Our industry would need to be quadruple its size to allow these things to happen, so unless we were all-in, it would not happen.

The argument with supermarkets is not about marketing, it's once again about scale and product range and price. If they can do a better job at a better price, then they will always build wealth, steal market share and adbsorb the competition. The only thing left for the small players is to find a nieche.

I also think to attribute all of our consumption choices to marketing strategies is insulting to the intelligence of the average consumer. Macca's is actually a good example. Young kiddies don't form their own opinions as well as adults, so marketing works a treat on them. Then when they get a bit older, it's about social acceptance and following the crowd (which is ignited by marketing) but I firmly believe that adults are mostly (not all) able to make their own choices. We all probably loved Macca's as a kid, and hassled to go as much as possible. Then when we got a bit older we would go there (but less often) because it was what we knew and it's where other people went. By the time we reach adulthood, we realised it was shit and no amount of marketing will make us go back. Except for the least aware among us, this holds throughout the marketplace.

Sorry Kaiser but the Obesity Epidemic in the western world has torpedoed your theory that adults can make rational choices.

I don't think that can ALL be put down to marketing, Freeride... That is a problem wrapped up in physiological, psychological and even evolutionary factors

My point wasn't about rationality, it was about what can persuade us. I definitely agree product promotion has a role in it, but there is a limit. With most of us but not all of us.

I also think people do think through their choice about food, but often they just don't give a shit, such is the inherent malaise of the 'civilised'

Read this article before your next post.

http://www.theage.com.au/lifestyle/diet-and-fitness/john-yudkin-the-man-...

Lustig is one of a growing number of scientists who don't just believe sugar makes you fat and rots teeth. They're convinced it's the cause of several chronic and very common illnesses, including heart disease, cancer, Alzheimer's and diabetes. It's also addictive, since it interferes with our appetites and creates an irresistible urge to eat.

Physiological, psychological and evolutionary...

kaiser wrote:

I don't think that can ALL be put down to marketing, Freeride... That is a problem wrapped up in physiological, psychological and even evolutionary factors

My point wasn't about rationality, it was about what can persuade us. I definitely agree product promotion has a role in it, but there is a limit. With most of us but not all of us.

I also think people do think through their choice about food, but often they just don't give a shit, such is the inherent malaise of the 'civilised'

Evolutionary? Read the complete article.

Yes I do think evolutionary is partly correct. I reckon there are signs that the makeup of westerners (including genetic) is being affected by our diets.

You are right, there is a systemic problem with what is readily available, and there is a conspiracy of sorts involved, But if something is physically addictive, I have trouble putting its consumption solely down to marketing.

Price comes into it again. While we continue on the food angle, costs of production, shelf life etc come into play. We are hooked already, then we choose the cheapest, tastiest and most convenient.

Does everyone here raise their hand as a victim of the food companies? Or do we like to think we mostly make our own decisions? I sometimes reckon I fall victim, but not because of an advertisement

Hi All
now this may sound like a bit of a naive comment but , cant alot of the problems in the manufacturing industry in australia be put down to trade tarrifs , eg if somthing can be produced in australia at a reasonable price shouldnt a similar imported item by taxed ( import duty ) at such a level that australian products are a more attractive commodity , if the australian public buy australian made goods how can this be a bad thing for the economy and for the workers of this country ? just a thought anyway

This is definitely a strategy, Bishmann and it would work if we were big enough to throw our weight around with the countries that export to us, but we also supply them with a lot of raw materials and want them to import what little we have to offer. Big boys win the pissing contests, unfortunately.

That being said, it goes against Free Trade economics, which is a mythical thing that we can only aspire for but never obtain, like democracy

Its very simple the cost of everything in Australia is too much compared to many other countries, fuelled by high wages plus there is to many hoops to jump and its only going to get worse.

Australia may have once been the lucky country and we still have lots of good things going, but we are screwing it up pretty quickly.

Marketing is a complex field and not to be confused with promotion or advertising which is but one facet of an overall marketing campaign, one strategy so to speak. A marketing campaign will utilise a number of marketing strategies to affect an increase in market share. Indeed product pricing and scaling a business are other marketing strategies along with things like product mix, placement, research into consumer habits of a target market etc etc. A good example of pricing being used as a market strategy is the pricing of milk by coles, this was an effective campaign to bring customers into the shop by pricing a necessity item below market cost with the view that discretionary buying would follow. Marketing will target children, teenagers, adults and the elderly in different ways and is highly effective.

Kaiser I agree with you that the size of the car market has played a big part in the demise of the car manufacturing industry in Australia, as I have mention in previous posts. Wages not so much, Hockey is trying to make out that wages and conditions are to blame but -"GM Holden and SPC Ardmona both refuted the Government's claim that workers' pay and conditions were to blame for industry troubles." and from Toyota -“Toyota Australia has never blamed the union for its decision to close its manufacturing operations by the end of 2017, neither publicly or in private discussions with any stakeholders,” the company said in a statement.
“As stated at the time of the announcement, there is no single reason that led to this decision.
“The market and economic factors contributing to the decision include the unfavourable Australian dollar ... and low economies of scale for our vehicle production and local supplier base.
“Together with one of the most open and fragmented automotive markets in the world and increased competitiveness due to current and future Free Trade Agreements, it is not viable to continue building cars in Australia.”

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/joe-hockey-toyota-...

Fair enough Silicun, I think we both agree that a car industry in Australia has been doomed for a while, and to lay political blame is futile. Your milk example is another worrying portent. If they drive dairy into the ground we will be ruing its demise also. Makes you wonder, though. If the producer cannot sustain the price, they should be able to abstain from selling, but for some reason they don't. But as said before, smaller players can find a nieche and we are already seeing that.

I have been struck by the irony of me bagging unproductive workforces while watching this forum intently. Following these can be a real time vaccuum...

yeah blaming political parties for these things is just not the case in most instances,, they are business decisions the bottom line is always the priority, these closures have happened under labour as well and have been coming for a while, with the downturn globally there will be more to come sadly.

the milk is an interesting case, coles has these producers over a barrel because the shelf life of the product is so short, abstaining from selling once they have a contract with coles is not an option the milk will simply waste.

hehe time vacuum for sure!!

Oil is the key. If everything ends up offshore and we do indeed reach 'peak oil', we will be one expensive country. In some ways oil needs to be priced higher. It would see more national industry across the world, and we would be further ahead in alternative energies. Take Bonds for eg. If they can make the product thousands of k's overseas and ship it back to oz cheaper than they can make it here, something is way off.

Same with beer. I've bought Japanese beer that is made in Canada because that is the cheapest way for them to get it to Australia and sell competitively. But it's beer, so the more I think about it, the more I try not to think about it

abbott has the answer. Let as many companies go to the wall as possible thereby increasing the pool of unemployed allowing the big corporations to hire desperate employees at a huge discount. Easy!

What about Shorten?

"Shorten is defending the unpopular carbon tax his party before the election actually promised to scrap. He’s opposing $5 billion in spending cuts his party before the election actually promised to pass. He’s attacking the Government for a 6 per cent unemployment rate that Labor in government itself predicted. He’s denouncing union corruption while fighting a royal commission to root it out. He’s blaming the government for car makers closing when the first two big ones to fall fell under Labor. He’s giving Labor policies the credit for the Government stopping the boats these past nine weeks when Labor never managed to achieve that feat itself in its last five years in government. He attacked the Government for not giving SPC Ardmona a $25 million subsidy when the company has since admitted it could survive without it." Andrew Bolt. (One of Floyd's favourite im guessing)
I bet Abbott hopes they don't get rid of Bill Shorten eh Floyd .

I wonder what the future will bring for Australia?....

To me it just seems like we have skrewed ourselves over with how high our wages are that effect everything else , long term i think we need to at least come more into line with places like NZ and USA and narrow the huge gap between Asia, otherwise we will never see an end to business going offshore..thats is unless our government protects all kinds of industries, but that will still cause problems.

I also think we have a huge problem in real-estate and how we view it, we view it as an $ investment when it should be alongside water and food as a human right (shelter) the huge problem in my eyes is the tax concessions we give to allow tax write offs (negative gearing) and the crazy laws that allow non Australian citizens to buy real-estate, both have contributed to crazy prices and pushed first home owners out of the market and cause all kinds of social stress and pressure, like the need for there to be two wage earners in a household, meaning less time for our kids..among other things.

The other big problem is our population growth that is not sustainable, we allow it to increase too fast even encouraging/paying for people to have children, which affects everyones quality of life, and puts more and more pressure environmentally and also resource wise, land, water and more, it also puts huge pressure on infrastructure which we are not keeping up with, roads, hospital beds, schools etc

To make it worse we have unsustainable immigration that causes all the above problems, while as harsh as it sounds these people have also not contributed tax wise through there life's but will still cash in on things like social security benefits and old age pension.

Anyway thats my rant for today.

Shorten would have to be one of the most ineffectual opposition leaders I have ever witnesses, manoeuvred himself into the leadership by undermining the two previous leader of lab and has zero to offer, pathetic really.

Indo Dreaming, I couldnt agree more on your description of the housing market, the tax breaks and negative gearing has made it all but impossible for current and future generations to buy into the market without becoming indebted for the rest of their lives. Meanwhile the babyboomers are sitting on multiple properties renting them out at premium prices. The price of houses and rentals has steamed ahead of wages at a rate of knots which brings us to the question of wages.

We are staring down the barrel of increased taxes, cuts to education, welfare and health all of which will affect the working class and the less well off in society. We are looking at further loss of stability in jobs ie more contracts and more casual and loss of penalty rates to increasing the pension age, again things that will affect the working class and less well off. If we are to look at wages we must address the issues of the wealthy and our life styles. If wages have to decrease then the middle class are going to have to realise that the current levels of consumption are unsustainable, that it is unrealistic to be building the biggest houses in the world -http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/how-big-is-a-house-average-house-size-by... and living similarly extravagant lifestyles.

Are the middle class willing to accept a downsize in lifestyle? It will be a painful transition thats for sure! The wages that people enjoy in Australia reflect a lifestyle of enormous consumption, Im sure your experience in Indonesia illustrates this more clearly than any picture I can paint. Another stark contrast in Indonesia is the gap between rich and poor, this is where we are headed by the logic of decreasing wages for the middle class and increasing the tax burden and cost on services.

The wealthy will be largely unaffected and the (often foreign owned) companies that make mind boggling profits from the land/water/personnel and mineral resources in Australia will be looking at even greater profits
- http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-18/bhp-billitons-half-year-profit-jum...
- http://www.news.com.au/finance/business/big-four-banks-make-27-billion-i...

Why is their such strong opposition to taxing these industries for the benefit of all Australians? The argument that jobs will go offshore doesnt wash, how can Australian minerals be exploited if the companies want to take their operations offshore. How can Australian agricultural property be exploited by China and other big stake holders taking operations offshore?
- http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/19/mining-tax-its-time...

1000 jobs go at Qantas, ie 1000 people looking at the dole $3-400/week, Adam Joyce takes a pay cut to $2mil or say $38,000/week, how can anyone seriously look at these numbers and think that wages are too high for everyday Australians? Its time that realistic remuneration is placed on this end of earner or realistic taxes on these guys and the companies that are stripping out Australian resources. Ill happily take a pay cut if I can see some equitable balance in wages.

Public Sector workers now need to watch what comments they make on social media websites(like Swellnet)as any criticism of the current government could result in them losing their job!
http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/colleagues-told-dob-in-political...

That's insane YS!

Seems like a fair call to me, why would you want someone working for you that was white anting you on social media.

So public servants work for Tony Abbott, eh?

As prime minister of Australia and head of government I would have said yes they do.

reecen - don't they work for the taxpayers? Doesn't Abbott work for the taxpayers? One mans' "white ant" is another man's "whistleblower".....

ABS figures for mid 2012 put the Australian Public Sector workforce at 1,892,100 or 16.4% of the total workforce. Good way to silence dissent.

Another leader had similar ideas.....

“The best way to take control over a people and control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible reductions. In this way, the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed.” - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

Btw, Yorkes, it was Labor who first brought this law in..... 2012 Public Service Commission guidelines...... But of course the coalition are running with it...... They are both as bad as eachother, both using the same tactic......

Hmmmm.... the way I read this though is that it seems to apply only to the Dept.of Prime Minister and Cabinet. Sounds like pretty sloppy jounalism to me and is typical scaremongering.

If it is only the PM and C, I agree with the legislation as that depatment has a direct link to the office of the Prime Minister. It also mentions that the legislation applies to gratuitous attacks on any political party or person, not just the coalition.

If you take on a job and then proceed to usurp and undermine your boss from within anonymously I think you have to question why you took that job in the first place.

Please corrrect me if i'm wrong but I doubt this legislation applies to public servants such as cops or teachers or welfare workers, only to the dept. PM and C.

Ah ok Sheepy like reecen said seems like a fair call then;) just joking its a crap rule whoever thought it up!
Public servants should be able to express their views on social media anonymously without their work colleagues dobbing them in. With the mainstream media feeding us a daily serve of bullshit, social media is all we have got to hear dissenting views.

Let's face it. You would have to have something seriously wrong with you to work with Abbot, Knight of the Royal Lickers of English aristocratic rear ends.

Yorkes.. I fully agree with you... It's just i hold both sides accountable...
Zen, I'm sure we've all called a boss of ours a "wanker" at some stage..... I'm afraid this is the beginning of a wedge....... I'm not going to get into an orwellian hypothesis, but what sort of example is this setting to the wider community? Should we all peer over the neighbours fence?

Shouldn't public servants be serving the public, instead of spying on one another? Can one public servant sabotage anothers career? Are our paid politicians that precious? Just get on and do the job of governing Australia well, and people will ignore one bitchy post in Andrew Bolt....
Dangerous times we are living in, Zen.....

@sheepy- agreed then but to me there's no shortage of forces in the mainstream media and society holding the Labor Party to account for every misstep they made in the last six years. I just wish there was more scrutiny of the new government and the hidden agenda they have to erode and undermine the benefits and working conditions Australian's have worked so hard for.

That's the beauty of the 5th estate and social media. It's the only place to get an unfiltered view of what is happening in the country.

yorkessurfer wrote:

@sheepy- agreed then but to me there's no shortage of forces in the mainstream media and society holding the Labor Party to account for every misstep they made in the last six years. I just wish there was more scrutiny of the new government and the hidden agenda they have to erode and undermine the benefits and working conditions Australian's have worked so hard for.

That's the beauty of the 5th estate and social media. It's the only place to get an unfiltered view of what is happening in the country.

Bias exists, Yorky..... Murdoch is pro Abbott.... Fairfax and the ABC are pro Labor..... However, those of the extreme right holding "ditch the witch" signs, or those on the far left painting nazi signs doesn't help anyone......
I'm not gonna go through it all again, but I stand my my opinions here -
http://www.swellnet.com/news/surfpolitik/2014/03/31/abbot-wonderland-or-...

Only attacking bad policy will bring a bad government down........ Slogans, emotive signs and trickery will not do it, as the general populace becomes more cynical thanks to the internet......

The biggest worry for me is what I call the "Salem effect"...... Since 9/11, governments have singled out minorities for political purposes..... Muslims, gays, the unemployed, smokers, boat people, disabled..... So easy to join the rabid mob.... "feel so good to be part of a majority"...... I saw over the last few days that puppet Bolt softening up the masses for an attack on the elderly pensioners. I'd take it they are the next target.... Hockeys budget may have a few nasty surprises....

Yeah I saw that Bolt article in The Herald Sun the other day Sheepy. I'm in vicco at the moment. I wonder how many of those conservative leaning seniors would have voted for the coalition it they knew what was coming?
But of course last September Tony Abbott said he would'nt touch the pension if he got elected?
I will await the" Abbott Lied" hysteria in the mainstream media when the budget comes out! But I won't hold my breath......

Conservative voting seniors will always vote conservative, yorko, cos they are conservative... Rusted on Laborites will alway vote Labor..... It's the floating voter one must target to win government..... That 10% of voters that decide the future... Win them, and you win government....

there are so many factors involved in all of this but to quote some witty protester waving this sign which i think sums up the situation pretty well.

If an emperor runs and empire and a king runs a kingdom then who is running our country.....

Bit of a stretch calling the murdered immigrant at Manus a refugee don't you think ?

In the words of his own father he left Iran , not through fear of persecution, but because he thought he would have better chance at employment as an architect in Oz than in his homeland.

Don't blame him, I would do the same thing , but not exactly a refugee...

floyd wrote:

Stu, based on the stunned silence on this website on correspondent's views on the budget and the long list of lies and broken promises it would perhaps be an interesting exercise to determine Swellnet office is by a process of elimination of the effects on the reader of each lie. E.g.

(A) doesn't think or © lets the misses think about that stuff.

So by a process of elimination on the issue of all Swellnets education lies and broken promises either your readership totally comprises of pre-pubescent numb-nuts or Nick3 and on both CUNTS that's scary.

Health
Money
and SURF

Fair call Floyd :)

I think that is a bit harsh floyd. One Term Tony, Christopher Pain and Smokin'Joe have done a such a great job of revealing their ugliness and arrogance that some of us tempted to comment have been holding fire on the basis that we couldn't say anything more damaging than what they are saying themselves.
So Blowin', just a point of clarification. People are entitled to seek asylum and to have their case adjudicated fairly. Refugee? Asylum seeker? Why so anxious to clarify a moot point about a victim the responsibility for whose murder rests with our government?

Floyd... Open your eyes... Lots has been said in another thread....

Floyd... I'm with ya 100% man!!!! Sorry if I came across harsh..... I'm just saying some of us have been chatting about it in the golden age of fear thread