Oz Federal Election 2013 - Discussion and Comments

[casanovawa]

If he has the hallmark of a great PM then why has Malcolm Fraser said he will say or do anything to get power?

My fear is he will become a big joke like George W Bush.

[video=youtube;1L66KhP0jYg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L66KhP0jYg[/video]

And who gives a toss what Malcolm Fraser says or thinks???

If Malcolm is down on him I'd probably count that as a tick....

 

[dfcatch]

So how many billions can we save by not funding incompetent managers who are running car companies?

Not really sure why private schools get millions of dollars either.

1/ The States are responsible for Education.

2/ That's why the States are responsible for funding state schools, and the Feds subsidize private schools. The typical teacher union propaganda comparing federal funding for state schools vs federal funding for private schools is axiomatically misleading (like most union hot air).

3/ The reason is simple economics - it costs less to subsidize a private school place (and thus allow parents of Johnny to send him to private school) than it does to have to fully pay for Johnny to attend state school.

4/ There is a secondary argument about "choice", but this is secondary to the simple economics of the issue.

The irony of the public vs private debate is that lefties always complain about private school funding - but the reality is that 99% of state school parents would love to send their child to a private school if they could afford it.

Subsidizing that place allows more families the opportunity to afford such a thing.

And don't for one moment think that private students are all "rich kids", most aren't. And their parents go without and make serious sacrifices for many many years so that Johnny might have the best opportunities in life possible.

Fact is - the more students that attend private schools - the more money is freed up to spend on public education (as counter intuitive as that might first appear).

 

[The Rok]

Personally I don't believe Tony Abbott will make a "Great" Prime Minister, however I think he is the lesser of two evils.

 

[Pushka]

I stopped caring about Malcolm Fraser's "ponderings" a few years ago.

 

[Hvr]

Personally I don't believe Tony Abbott will make a "Great" Prime Minister, however I think he is the lesser of two evils.

As least you acknowledge he is evil. :evil:

Once he is in office I wonder how long until one of his colleagues knifes him in the back.

 

[The Rok]

As least you acknowledge he is evil. :evil:

Once he is in office I wonder how long until one of his colleagues knifes him in the back.

Well I don't vote so I have refrained from making comments in this thread, but I'll say this, I don't like TA. He seems to be too much of a sly snake in the grass, and I suspect that if he were elected, then it wouldn't be long before we started to hear about the skeletons in his closet that have not yet been revealed.

I also don't believe he has the charisma that I would like to see an Aussie PM have, especially for overseas relations. JG doesn't either, K.Rudd does.

 

[11sjw]

1/ The States are responsible for Education.

2/ That's why the States are responsible for funding state schools, and the Feds subsidize private schools. The typical teacher union propaganda comparing federal funding for state schools vs federal funding for private schools is axiomatically misleading (like most union hot air).

3/ The reason is simple economics - it costs less to subsidize a private school place (and thus allow parents of Johnny to send him to private school) than it does to have to fully pay for Johnny to attend state school.

4/ There is a secondary argument about "choice", but this is secondary to the simple economics of the issue.

The irony of the public vs private debate is that lefties always complain about private school funding - but the reality is that 99% of state school parents would love to send their child to a private school if they could afford it.

Subsidizing that place allows more families the opportunity to afford such a thing.

And don't for one moment think that private students are all "rich kids", most aren't. And their parents go without and make serious sacrifices for many many years so that Johnny might have the best opportunities in life possible.

Fact is - the more students that attend private schools - the more money is freed up to spend on public education (as counter intuitive as that might first appear).

Similar arguments are made re scrapping negative gearing re housing and the subsequent burden placed on public housing.

 

[Pushka]

I remember before Julia's treachery that Ruddy was very unpopular and his charisma had somewhat turned to brass.

I'd forgo charisma right now for fundamental leadership and financial management. Leave the charisma for the pop stars.

 

[eastwest101]

Well I don't vote so I have refrained from making comments in this thread, but I'll say this, I don't like TA. He seems to be too much of a sly snake in the grass, and I suspect that if he were elected, then it wouldn't be long before we started to hear about the skeletons in his closet that have not yet been revealed.

So you don't like the leader of the opposition but cannot be bothered to vote for any alternative like the ALP, Greens, Independant, KAP, Anti-pokies etc etc ? Nice one. Don't get me wrong - its your right not to vote - but if you really believe that stuff maybe you would want to say, vote for another party? Or would you prefer to not vote and just make vague unfounded allegations about politicians?

I also don't believe he has the charisma that I would like to see an Aussie PM have, especially for overseas relations. JG doesn't either, K.Rudd does.

Last time we had an election based on charisma we got Kevin Rudd, an dysfunctional incompetent government that "lost its way" with nothing but empty symbolism in its list of acheivements and whose leader was dispatched by his deputy/unions/factions/collagues. I think most of us are not too concerned about charisma, maybe a bit of competence and some results might be a better measure of your politicians in the future??

 

[The Rok]

So you don't like the leader of the opposition but cannot be bothered to vote for any alternative like the ALP, Greens, Independant, KAP, Anti-pokies etc etc ? Nice one. Don't get me wrong - its your right not to vote - but if you really believe that stuff maybe you would want to say, vote for another party? Or would you prefer to not vote and just make vague unfounded allegations about politicians?



Last time we had an election based on charisma we got Kevin Rudd, an dysfunctional incompetent government that "lost its way" with nothing but empty symbolism in its list of acheivements and whose leader was dispatched by his deputy/unions/factions/collagues. I think most of us are not too concerned about charisma, maybe a bit of competence and some results might be a better measure of your politicians in the future??

I said I don't vote, not that I don't bother. And your comments are the very reason I have abstained thus far from making comments in this thread.

I am not an Australian Citizen…….. So your assumptions about me are a little out of line. Anyway, as I am not a Australian Citizen I will bow out of your politics discussion now… My opinion matters little anyway!

 

[medhead]

1/ The States are responsible for Education.

2/ That's why the States are responsible for funding state schools, and the Feds subsidize private schools. The typical teacher union propaganda comparing federal funding for state schools vs federal funding for private schools is axiomatically misleading (like most union hot air).

3/ The reason is simple economics - it costs less to subsidize a private school place (and thus allow parents of Johnny to send him to private school) than it does to have to fully pay for Johnny to attend state school.

4/ There is a secondary argument about "choice", but this is secondary to the simple economics of the issue.

The irony of the public vs private debate is that lefties always complain about private school funding - but the reality is that 99% of state school parents would love to send their child to a private school if they could afford it.

Subsidizing that place allows more families the opportunity to afford such a thing.

And don't for one moment think that private students are all "rich kids", most aren't. And their parents go without and make serious sacrifices for many many years so that Johnny might have the best opportunities in life possible.

Fact is - the more students that attend private schools - the more money is freed up to spend on public education (as counter intuitive as that might first appear).

Sorry, but the real question is more how much subsidy is required for private schools. How many students will move from private to public if the subsidy is removed? I suspect not many, so this argument that private school funding takes the burden off the public school system is a bit of a falsehood, really.

Australian independent schools AIS, NSW, quote a 2011 productivity commission report that independent school students received $6100 per student in 2008/09 from both federal and state governments. Compared to $13544 for government schools. So if all private school government funding was diverted to government schools it is only once about 50% of students leave private schools that the government is worse off. I really don't think there would be that much of an effect.

Also the federal government does provide funding to states for government schools.

 

[QF WP]

Photo courtesy of Mrs LW.



They came to see how our taxpayer funds were spent on building a new hall. I'll admit it is a great hall and I never knew what the old one was like, so kudos from that viewpoint.

Peter is looking much older than Wayne. Must have been the hard life on the road as a muso

 

[lovestotravel]

Personally I don't believe Tony Abbott will make a "Great" Prime Minister, however I think he is the lesser of two evils.

Indeed!

Once he is in office I wonder how long until one of his colleagues knifes him in the back.

Hopefully Malcolm

 

[11sjw]

Photo courtesy of Mrs LW.

That photo could be the basis for a "Caption this" competition.

My suggestion: "Pete, you made a bit of coin as a muso, you got a spare $20 or $30B lying around? I could really use it, you see I promised a surplus and have no idea how I'm going to manage it. Not only that our future forecasts are stuffed given the Carbon Price tanking like it has."

 

[Pushka]

If the federal govt removed their funding from private schools, esp the small Catholic ones, then the fees would rise so much and many people could simply not afford them anymore. The exodus would swamp the public system. So the argument does hold up. And yes, it's state funding that is the mainstay of public education.

 

[medhead]

They came to see how our taxpayer funds were spent on building a new hall. I'll admit it is a great hall and I never knew what the old one was like, so kudos from that viewpoint.

Peter is looking much older than Wayne. Must have been the hard life on the road as a muso

The hall at our school is pretty damn good as well. The kids also get to be inside and still do sport when it's raining, instead of watching videos or something. There is also a community available gym/fitness area in the hall as well. I've read the horror stories about what public schools have got and that private schools did much better with their funding. Our school seems to have done very well, as a private school, so I think it was money well spent.

 

[medhead]

If the federal govt removed their funding from private schools, esp the small Catholic ones, then the fees would rise so much and many people could simply not afford them anymore. The exodus would swamp the public system. So the argument does hold up. And yes, it's state funding that is the mainstay of public education.

That really doesn't add up. I've turned on a computer to add the link to the site of my previous information. School Funding

So there is the $6100 from the government to independent schools, versus $13000 odd for government school student. The website also claims that parents/ fundraising provided 60% of the funding. Sure some people will no longer be able to afford to pay the extra $6100. But there is little chance that is going to be as many as 50% of students. Many of the parents will be able to pay more, even at a struggle, and will place the value on the education that those schools provide.

It's hardly going to be a mass exodus.

Having said all that the website I'm looking at is a bit contridictory in the numbers provided, but it is just a random google result to find out the per student values.

 

[QF WP]

This is a public school, so it looks like we taxpayers got good value for the cost (which I'd love to know).

Personally I'd rather have seen the money spent on literacy and numeracy, not that my son and daughter need help there. Plenty of worthwhile projects never got the funding because of this - blatant vote grabbing instead??

The hall at our school is pretty damn good as well. The kids also get to be inside and still do sport when it's raining, instead of watching videos or something. There is also a community available gym/fitness area in the hall as well. I've read the horror stories about what public schools have got and that private schools did much better with their funding. Our school seems to have done very well, as a private school, so I think it was money well spent.

 

[Pushka]

I'm just glad my kids are grown up and we don't pay fees anymore. I guess mortgage payments are way down but utilities, medicines and other costs are way up. And then there's vet bills. Which is way off topic but the cost of vet services is eye watering.

 

[medhead]

This is a public school, so it looks like we taxpayers got good value for the cost (which I'd love to know).

Personally I'd rather have seen the money spent on literacy and numeracy, not that my son and daughter need help there. Plenty of worthwhile projects never got the funding because of this

Given the current political commentary about the budget situation, there appears to be very little support for these halls and etc. As such I fail to see how intangible (in terms of having a physical asset) things like literacy and numeracy would have been supported. So while I agree that those items, and I'm sure the other projects you mention, are very worthy of funding, they could/would never be funded anyway. The government could fund many wonderful things, but the electorate would never stand the increased taxes. I think the health minister on Q&A hit on this well, there is a limited bucket to fund what people want but ironically the electorate is unwilling to pay for what they want. Sure, I'll be the first to agree massive restructuring is required of the public service and how money is spent. That would certainly help the situation to spend money more efficiently. But neither potential government post September seem to have the intestinal fortitude to fix those problems.

edit: This makes me despair - to have no acceptable choice of government.

- blatant vote grabbing instead??

I don't think so. I think it was an honest attempt to keep the economy moving during the GFC. I'm sure that we could write a 1000 pages on efficient spending of money and needs, as per above. But that isn't a reason to think they weren't doing what they thought was best. The other thing is the current commentary clearly shows that they haven't purchased votes. As does the last election result.