Rudd v Gillard v Rudd.


4th Feb 2012
9:54am

One of the funniest comments I've seen, re the possibibility of Rudd replacing Gillard.

 

Geoff of Central Coast Posted at 8:58 AM Today

What a world class embarrassment it would be should Rudd come back as leader. Headlines could read Australian leader dumped because he was useless replaced by our first female Prime Minister who is now being dumped because she was more useless than the useless one she replaced, now being replaced by the original useless one because all else in their party are seen as more useless than the first two usless ones. Must make the Labor Ministers feel bright and special. Australia, the lucky country?

Comment 50 of 58

Link

innes
avater
2nd Mar 2012
4:13am

Nautilus,  you don't seem to understand that the bulk of people vote on & believe in perception.  It does not matter whether there are a lot of illegal boat people or only a few.  It does not matter whether they are refugees or not.  The man in the street will vote against the Government that does not bring it under control.  It matters not at all whether the carbon tax is good or bad or even if it were introduced by JC himself.  The man in the street believes more strongly about the carbon tax than he ever did about the GST.  At this point in time, right or wrong, the public will vote against a Government that introduced a carbon tax especially when it was stated quite clearly just before the Election that no Government led by Gillard would introduce one.  The man in the street could not care less whether there is a mining super tax or not.  You can bring in every argument you like for or against, but it does not alter the fact that an amazing number of Australian's are racist & still believe in the White Australia Policy & will vote accordingly.

You stated "why is it so important to ultra right wingers to join Labor & the Greens at the hip?"   You then state that you did not state that the Lib/Nat coalition is ultra right wing, it is only nautilus & myself.  So, you are stating that Abbott is not pushing the relationship between Labor & the Greens?

Nothing to do with the points above, but would you please tell me why the majority of the Boat People come via the Jakarta International Airport, with a very expensive return ticket to their home Country, & never put in an application for asylum at our horribly expensive AVAC office in Jacarta?

Mussitate
avater
2nd Mar 2012
5:19am

innes, I think your response was meant for me.

Your first long paragraph is correct but why is it correct.  It is because the average australian reads and watches Mainstream Corporate Media (MCM).  Two reasons why the MCM push and promoted GST.  

1.The wealthy elite wanted the GST because they had been promised tax cuts and the average Australian footed the bill, not them

2.The MCM would miss out on mega bucks being paid by little johnny to present the mega advertising campaign to the public, if they presented a different view to the public to that which the government wanted they would miss out on that golden stream

3.The above two points are also relevant in regard to the average Australian rejecting tax on mining Super profits and rejecting the carbon tax.  The only difference is that it is not the government spending oodles of money on advertising but the Mining consortiums and the polluters - Big End of Town lot. 

4.Keeping the racist ticket going is a tired political ploy to keep peoples attention away from real issues.  It is an ugly thing really.  If we were told constantly that racism is a bad thing and that everyone feels 'tribal' at some stage in their lives but that Australians are cleverer than that...you would see a big shift in public opinion.  But that is not going to happen, is it.

So, you are stating that Abbott is not pushing the relationship between Labor & the Greens? Can't respond because I do not understand this question and how it relates.

I met some Americans the other day that had done the exact same thing - bought plane tickets but didn't go back.  It is good that Indonesia and asian countries have done reasonably well throughout the GFC, we only have to worry about 'economic' refugees coming in via the air, from the troubled western countries and those middle eastern countries which the west has invaded and interfered with.

innes
avater
2nd Mar 2012
5:55am

I apologise to nautilus.  My reply was to mussitate.

You have avoided the facts that I stated.  It is being constantly pushed that we are not racist.  We are.  It makes not one iota whether you think any different, we are.  Whether it is a tired political ploy or anything else, does not effect the voting of the average Australian.  He/she objects very strongly to Illegal Immigrants & votes accordingly.  It is immaterial to the fact, right or wrong that the average Australian objects very strongly to the Carbon Tax & couldn't give  damn about the Mining Tax.

Whether you approve & or agree or not, ALL the boat people coming via Indonesia are extremely wealthy by their Country of origin standards & are mostly economic refugees.

I presume that your American acquantances had holiday visas, issued on the spot by our Airport Immigration officials for 30, 60 or 90 days.  When those Visas run out, they will become illegal Immigrants & they will, sooner or later be found & deported.  The only thing ensuing is that they will never be able to successfully Immigrate to Australia any time in the future.  In actual fact, it wiil probably be impossible for them to ever have another holiday in Australia.   A very stupid move, as it is relatively easy for a Citizen of the USA to immigrate to Australia legally.

Mussitate
avater
2nd Mar 2012
6:01pm

I appreciate your honesty and straightforwardness and I agree with what you have said.

However, my biggest point was and is, that the general public would NOT be so racist or against mining and carbon tax, IF the Mainstream Corporate Media had not saturated the market with the mining magnates and polluting baron's point of view.  You have not responded to this.

Why is it relatively easy for a citizen of the US to immigrate to Australia legally as compared to..say..Indonesia???

2nd Mar 2012
8:11am

innes said "Whether you approve & or agree or not, ALL the boat people coming via Indonesia are extremely wealthy by their Country of origin standards & are mostly economic refugees."

I don't think that is correct.

Nautilus
avater
2nd Mar 2012
2:04pm

If you don't think it is correct you must have evidence of altruistc people smugglers who do it for nix.

Is there such a beast or do people smugglers charge what the market can stand and there are those who can afford their services, even if that means sending a child instead to gain a foothold and eventual benefits for the sponsor/s?

Mussitate
avater
2nd Mar 2012
6:19pm

innes didn't present any evidence in his statement, so why should you demand that fwed do so.  

Even innes's account below which is rather good, is not really supported by 'evidence'.

Nautilus
avater
2nd Mar 2012
6:37pm

Say what?  I asked because I am interested in what fwed has to say.

Obviously you are not interested.

Mussitate
avater
3rd Mar 2012
12:39am

Huh...your original response to fwed also missed the whole point of what fwed said and then asked for evidence on something he didn't even say....

Now you are saying you only asked for evidence because you were interested in something that fwed didn't even say.....

I was interested in his original point but no, I am not interested in what you said he said.

 

3rd Mar 2012
3:12am

nautilus "Say what?  I asked because I am interested in what fwed has to say."

I don't think that is correct (true) either.

innes
avater
2nd Mar 2012
9:36am

fwed, a return ticket from Kabul to Jakarta costs approximately 780,000 Afghani, or about $1,500 Au as against an average male income of around 260,000 Afghana, or $500 Au.  Add to that the reputed boat fare to Christmas Island of $9,000, which must be paid in Aust., or American $s.  Total cost to an Afghani man of around 21 years income which makes him an extremely wealthy man in Afghanistan & probably an economic refugee.  I might add that he is also very well connected.  To get your hands on $9,000 US in Afghanistan is no mean feat.

Mussitate
avater
2nd Mar 2012
6:17pm

I don't see this situation as an economic refugee, in many instances.

For example: Some Afghani have assisted the invading forces and are therefore vulnerable when the invading forces retreat and simply leave then to those that they have betrayed.

These afghani people are in a dire situation and will in all probability be given a death sentence, if they stay.  They may be well to do people or they may have earned sufficient money from the invading forces, however, they are still fleeing for their lives.  They are simply refugees.

Just because a refugee has money does not mean that they will not be killed if they return to their own country.  It has nothing to do with how much money they have but what situation they are in.  Refugee does NOT equal poor.

innes, if Australia was invaded and our lives and our family lives were in danger, particularly if we were identified as 'activists' against the invaders, would we be called economic refugees and not allowed entry into another country as a refugee simply because we were able to pay the cost of transport?  I don't think so.

It is another racist slur that is being spread about by our trusted Mainstream Corporate Media to put people against Refugees.

innes
avater
3rd Mar 2012
3:30am

mussitate, you state that what I have said is interesting but not backed up by evidence.  The cost of the airline return ticket is the cheapest on offer.  Check it up.  The average male income in Afghanistan is statistical.  Check it up.  The cost of the boat trip to Christmas Island is the lowest of the many quoted figures that have come out in many enquiries, ranging from $9,000 to $17,000.  With that sought of wealth, they could buy their way out of anything in a Country as corrupt as Afghanistan.  They ARE economic refugees!!!

Mussitate
avater
3rd Mar 2012
5:11am

I don't know whether you are purposely being obtuse or we are having a communication break down? The little bits about air fares are padding, not the main issue.  Why would I want to discuss those, I accepted your figures without question.

3rd Mar 2012
3:56am

A refugee is a person who owing to a well founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his/her nationality.

The accurate description of people who leave their country or place of residence because they want to seek a better life is "economic migrant" not economic refugee.

If the ones coming by boat from Indonesia have been granted refugee status it is unlikely they are economic migrants.
If they have not been granted refugee status they could be asylum seekers but innes has said they are (economic) refugees.

Refugee Council of Australia FAQ's

Mussitate
avater
3rd Mar 2012
5:15am

I totally agree with you.  The term economic refugee was used on this forum and possibly by our wonderful media.  Hence, it has been bandied about and lost itself in the mean time.

Thanks for putting us back on track.

innes
avater
3rd Mar 2012
4:16am

I must admit to partially agreeing with you fwed.  Anybody coming from Afghanistan has a legitimate claim to refugee status, although I still believe that the ones coming by boat through Indonesia come from a very special class of the extremely wealthy, by their standards.

Mussitate
avater
3rd Mar 2012
5:20am

If they fit into the category of refugee, it does not matter if they are wealthy.

I don't understand why this is important.  I would have thought you are used to such matters.  Our own wealthy elite are beyond the rule of law that is applied to the rest of us (a couple of examples: Packer (the old boy) (a) being identified in drug related crimes and having the alias given to him of Goanna but no charges (b) finding rubies on his property (what a joke) and not one enquiry made by authorities)

3rd Mar 2012
6:01am

Innes, is it possible to be wealthy and still be tortured ?

Wealthy status does not necessarily stop you from needing to seek asylum. In some countries it might be more likely for authorities to target the well educated, and therefore the wealthy, because they are the greatest threat to the  regime.

Is it also not reasonable to suggest that someone who fears being tortured and murdered might sell everything they own in order to escape ?

toot2000
avater
3rd Mar 2012
6:52pm

On the 14th December 2011 Julia Gillard wrote to Tony Abbott asking for a meeting about asylum seekers.  It was rejected.

Phillip Ruddock said that a compromise could include Malaysia if rules were tightened.  "In my view the government should seek to formalise its informal arrangements with Malaysia that people who are found to be refugees should not be returned to places of persecution.... that might be a way they could reach a compromise without Malaysia being a signatory."

Alexander Downer said "The public want the government to do something about this, when you see those people drowning, it's heart-wrenching stuff."

So here we have two of John Howard's ministers asking for both sides to negotiate but they hate each other so much, they can't sit in the same room together.  Hubris in the extreme.

......and the boats keep coming.

 

 

 

 

 

 

toot2000
avater
3rd Mar 2012
7:00pm

I wonder at Julia Gillard's decision to bring in an outsider, namely Bob Carr as Foreign Minister.  If I were a Labor MP, I would be feeling pretty p++++d off at the moment that she obviously feels there is not enough talent in her elected MP's to fill the shoes of Foreign Minister of Australia.

Nautilus
avater
3rd Mar 2012
7:18pm

If it is good enough for the Australian Public Service to have lateral recruits at senior levels and the Whitlam government was emphaptic that was the case and implemented changes, then no Labor politician should beef about a well qualified person being brought in to one of 'their' jobs.  New blood is good the Whitlam government said.

Besides, the greatest whinger according to the PM and the media was Stephen Smith and he hasn't exactly wreathed himself in the glory of accomplishments in the defence portfolio.

Nautilus
avater
3rd Mar 2012
7:10pm

It is the Greens who are blocking the government.

Isn't that something that should be resolved in the Bob Brown and Julia Gillard meetings?  They got their heads together on the carbon dioxide tax.

To be fair the Labor government ditched solutions that were working and the boats started arriving.

To make a comment, please register or login


Preview your comment

Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

  • Receive our daily enewsletter
  • Enter competitions
  • Comment on articles