View Poll Results: How long will Tony Abbott be Prime Minister?

Voters
21. You may not vote on this poll
  • He will resign or be replaced before the next election

    3 14.29%
  • He will lead the party to the next election but lose it

    4 19.05%
  • He will win the next election but not be PM at the one after it

    5 23.81%
  • He will win the next election but lose the one after it

    1 4.76%
  • He will win the next two elections

    7 33.33%
  • He will win the next 3, 4 or 5 elections

    1 4.76%
  • He will be there longer than Menzies

    0 0%
Page 2 of 22 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 328
  1. #16
    CC Grandmaster antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    16,877
    from above
    Abbott knows that if he is to be successful he will have to bring the majority of the people with him. The problem is that years of economic prosperity have made the vast majority of people complacent about the need for change. And that's the core of Tony Abbott's economic challenge - can Australia afford to delay the policy changes that need to made to ensure our future prosperity while he spends his first term preparing the public for what he's going to do in his second term.
    AC
    isn't one key option of this is the $75K to rich ladies to drop a kid - we must be heading into a much brighter economic future, was it Rudd or Abbots future actions to be able us to afford such?
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 14-09-2013 at 03:59 PM.
    Zionism is racism as defined by the UN, Israel by every dirty means available steals land and water, kill Palestinian freedom fighters and civilians, and operates an apartheid system to drive more Palestinians off their land

  2. #17
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,368
    Adults will start to run the country again:

    Tony Abbott to have carbon tax repeal legislation drawn up immediately after being sworn in
    BY CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT EMMA GRIFFITHS, ABC

    Prime Minister-elect Tony Abbott says his government will waste little time before getting down to business after he and his frontbench are officially sworn in this morning.

    Ten days after being elected to government, the Prime Minister-elect, his ministers and parliamentary secretaries will be officially commissioned by the Governor-General Quentin Bryce at Government House.

    Mr Abbott says he will immediately instruct the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to prepare legislation to repeal the carbon tax.

    He also says incoming treasurer Joe Hockey will instruct the board of the Clean Energy Corporation to cease operations.

    It is also expected that the Climate Change Authority and the Climate Commission will be abolished.

    "Today is not just a ceremonial day, it's an action day. The Australian people expect us to get straight down to business and that's exactly what this Government will do," Mr Abbott said.

    "As soon as I return to Parliament House from the swearing-in ceremony, I will instruct the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet to prepare the carbon tax repeal legislation."
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  3. #18
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,643
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono View Post
    Adults will start to run the country again:
    A good article in Crikey today, comparing the maturity of the Labour government with the petty behaviour of Tony Abbott:

    Labor thus kept demonstrating to financial markets that it was prepared to suffer the pain that accompanies more restrictive fiscal policy. That’s a key reason why Australia got and received a triple-A credit rating from all three major agencies for the first time in its history in 2011. And that’s why Barnett has lost Western Australia’s. He’s demonstrated no such commitment.
    ...
    Meantime, Abbott has given his Treasury secretary Martin Parkinson the flick, with the figleaf of a few months’ grace. The reason? Nothing to do with performance, just sheer unadulterated vindictiveness. Don’t be surprised if, down the track, independent analysts start wondering exactly how committed this government is to sound economic and fiscal management.

  4. #19
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,368
    More restrictive policy by Labor? Shows that Crikey is not a serious outfit, but rather a leftist online rag. That's what I mean about adults being in charge now. Howard's government inherited a huge deficit from the previous Labor government. Through good economic management, and despite the Asian Financial Crisis, at the end managed to produce one of the best surpluses in the Western world. It took hardly any time for Labor to blow it and rack up huge debts with KRudd's mad spending spree (home insulation fiasco, etc.). Now the adults have to pay all that debt back again.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  5. #20
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,643
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono View Post
    More restrictive policy by Labor? Shows that Crikey is not a serious outfit, but rather a leftist online rag. That's what I mean about adults being in charge now. Howard's government inherited a huge deficit from the previous Labor government. Through good economic management, and despite the Asian Financial Crisis, at the end managed to produce one of the best surpluses in the Western world. It took hardly any time for Labor to blow it and rack up huge debts with KRudd's mad spending spree (home insulation fiasco, etc.). Now the adults have to pay all that debt back again.
    The facts support the argument that Labour has been better at managing the budget than Howard:

    In simple terms, the facts show that in the five years from 2000-01, the Howard government increased real government spending by around 23%. In the five years from 2007-08, when Labor has controlled the budget purse strings, growth in real government spending has been a tick over 17%, including the 12.7% increase in 2008-09 when the GFC was bearing down on the Australian economy, threatening a recession.
    ...
    Never once did the Howard government deliver a cut in real spending in any of its 12 budgets. Nor did the Fraser government, for that matter, ever deliver a cut in real spending in its seven budgets. Twenty Coalition budgets and never a fall in real government outlays. This is staggering when put against the perceptions and rhetoric that so often do the rounds.
    For the Labor party, which unquestionably spent up big as the GFC hit, there have been two years in the current period of government where real government spending has fallen, in 2010-11 and this year, 2012-13. Indeed the cut in government spending this year is the largest cut ever recorded. It is worth noting at this point that there were three years in the Hawke/Keating era where there were cuts in real government spending, so over the last 40 years, the Coalition have never once cut spending while the Labor Party has delivered real cuts in five of its budgets.

    The Labour deficits were caused by the collapse in revenue (remember the GFC?), not excessive spending.

    And Abbott has to deal with the same lack of revenue, which is why he's not promising surpluses in the near future.

  6. #21
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,368
    When one spends as madly as KRudd, any reduction of spending might count as a "cut", but it's still very high. While I would like the Coalition to be more libertarian in its economics (which Crikey probably doesn't), it still managed to deliver budget surpluses, despite some of the difficulties like the Asian Financial Crisis, NASDAQ crash, 9-11.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  7. #22
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    The facts support the argument that Labour has been better at managing the budget than Howard:

    In simple terms, the facts show that in the five years from 2000-01, the Howard government increased real government spending by around 23%. In the five years from 2007-08, when Labor has controlled the budget purse strings, growth in real government spending has been a tick over 17%, including the 12.7% increase in 2008-09 when the GFC was bearing down on the Australian economy, threatening a recession.
    Why don't you compare spending as a percentage of GDP during Liberal and Labor government?
    For private coaching (IM, four times VIC champion) call or SMS 0417519733
    Computer tells you what to play. Good coach explains why.

  8. #23
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,567
    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg View Post
    Why don't you ...
    If you think that would be a useful comparison, why don't you?
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  9. #24
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,643
    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg View Post
    Why don't you compare spending as a percentage of GDP during Liberal and Labor government?
    Table 4 on page 10-10 appears to be what you want. I haven't done any calculations, but spending (as a % of GDP) appears to be about the same for both the Howard and Rudd/Gillard/Rudd governments.

  10. #25
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,567
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    Table 4 on page 10-10 appears to be what you want. I haven't done any calculations, but spending (as a % of GDP) appears to be about the same for both the Howard and Rudd/Gillard/Rudd governments.
    Personally I'm suspicious of spending as a percentage of GDP comparisons because if you take the World Bank's GDP data then the Australian GDP growth since 2003 has been nothing like the growth for the three decades leading up to 2003 nor has the federal government spend showed a discernible shift from roughly linear growth over the same period. That being said, Stephen Koukoulas also did an analysis of tax to GDP in December 2012. See The better economic manager (The Drum, Dec 2012)

    The tax to GDP ratio has averaged 21.1 per cent of GDP in the five years of the current Labor Government. The highest tax to GDP ratio in those years is for 2012-13 where it will reach 22.2 per cent. Under the Liberal Party-lead Coalition, the Howard government tax to GDP ratio averaged 23.4 per cent over its 12 years in office and never once did it fall below 22.2 per cent. In other words, the tax to GDP ratio under the current government is at a level last seen during the Keating government in the early 1990s and before that, we have to go back to the 1970s to see such a low-taxing government.

    In terms of spend to GDP...

    In what should be an embarrassing fact for Mr Hockey, 2012-13 will see real government spending fall 4.4 per cent, the biggest cut ever recorded. This cut will see the government spending to GDP ratio fall to 23.8 per cent, having previously been ramped up to successfully counter the shock from the global financial crisis. This level of spending is 0.4 per cent of GDP below the average government spending level of the Howard government. In today's dollar terms, the 0.4 per cent of GDP amounts to around $6 billion.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  11. #26
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,368
    Dr Byrom should be happy with his new-found concern for sound economic management Commonwealth agencies to be cut by Abbott Government
    STEVE LEWIS, Telegraph, SEPTEMBER 22, 2013

    AGENCIES responsible for tackling obesity, capital city planning and security advice on asylum seekers are to be slashed as Tony Abbott takes the axe to Labor's reform agenda.

    Less than a week after taking office, the Coalition Government has scrapped plans to build a multimillion-dollar embassy in Africa, and will also wipe $100 million off research funding.

    The Prime Minister has also pulled the pin on a key Kevin Rudd initiative - Community Cabinet - as he instructs his new ministry team to put the broom through the bureaucracy.

    Key elements of Labor's reform agenda are being dismantled.

    The Major Cities Unit - which provided advice on developing Australia's 18 biggest cities - and the Social Inclusion Unit in Mr Abbott's own Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet will be dismantled.

    The Coalition will also begin unwinding key "nanny state'' agencies such as the Australian National Preventative Health Agency, established to lead the national fight against obesity, alcohol abuse and tobacco use.

    Health Minister Peter Dutton has been critical of ANPHA's decision to spend $500,000 on a study into a potential "fat tax" despite neither side of politics supporting such a move.

    Senior ministers are now searching for big savings from departments with a raft of back office operations and smaller agencies on the chopping block.

    "It's out of control,'' one senior minister said, of the rapid growth in Commonwealth agencies.

    Excellent! May they cut more, including even more foreign "aid" that just enables despots to build palaces and buy arms to oppress their own people. Laborites, bureaucrats, and other suckers of the government teat will squeal piteously. But most Australians won't even notice the difference, so will realize that we didn't need these bloated and expensive government programs in the first place.

    Remember, KRudd campaigned as an economic conservative in 2007, but proved to be a profligate spender and waster, as well as a tax gouger, as was JuLiar "there will be no carbon tax in a government I lead" Gillardova. Looks like Abbott is walking the walk as well. May he be consistent and abandon his crass parental leave boondoggle.
    Last edited by Capablanca-Fan; 24-09-2013 at 02:25 AM.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  12. #27
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,567
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono View Post
    ... will also wipe $100 million off research funding.
    I'd like to see the official statement on this. Abbott and Hockey comments I've seen have been more to do with prioratising away from the humanities and I've also seen comments that medical research will not be reduced. So taken of face value we are talking about the ARC who have two large schemes, Discovery and Linkage. Now Linkage will likely be not greatly affected since they rely heavily on industry partnerships which substantial in kind contributions from the industry partners. That leaves the Discovery projects which an total annual budget of around $550m. "Saving" $100m from that is not possible without having a huge impact on the sort of research that Abbott and Hockey like (i.e. things other than the humanities). For example 732 discovery projects were approved last year, of this 15 were in the broad area of philosophy and religious studies. You are not going to effect a $100m savings even if you completely shut down philosophy research across the entire country.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  13. #28
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,643
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Dr Byrom should be happy with his new-found concern for sound economic management
    Most of those cuts seem sensible, although they will have almost no effect on the budget.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Remember, KRudd campaigned as an economic conservative in 2007, but proved to be a profligate spender and waster, as well as a tax gouger, as was JuLiar "there will be no carbon tax in a government I lead" Gillardova. Looks like Abbott is walking the walk as well. May he be consistent and abandon his crass parental leave boondoggle.
    Did you read the data RW and I posted about Labour spending/taxing, Jono? But I agree with you about Abbott's parental leave scheme - I would much rather have Labour's proposal.

  14. #29
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    Table 4 on page 10-10 appears to be what you want. I haven't done any calculations, but spending (as a % of GDP) appears to be about the same for both the Howard and Rudd/Gillard/Rudd governments.
    Thanks for the link. Labor's still look about one percentage point higher then Howard's. Under Howard it steadily (almost) decreased from 26.2% (inherited from Keating, I presume) to 23.8%. Under Labor it jumped to 25.9% and then gradually decreased to 25.1%.
    I also noted that 2013 is still shown as an estimate. Did it take into account budget adjustment through the 2012-2013? I suspect the realised figure might be higher then 25.1%

    I even calculated few stats from regression analysis, but they are not very meaningful due to lack of observations:
    Howard:
    Mean 24.73%
    Std 0.84%
    Mean Error 0.24%

    Fitting regression:
    Intercept 25.35 (se 0.52)
    Trend -0.095(se 0.071)

    Labor:
    Mean 25.66%
    Std 0.41%
    Mean Error 0.18%

    Fitting regression:
    Intercept 26.35 (se 0.34)
    Trend -0.23(se 0.104)
    For private coaching (IM, four times VIC champion) call or SMS 0417519733
    Computer tells you what to play. Good coach explains why.

  15. #30
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    Most of those cuts seem sensible, although they will have almost no effect on the budget.
    Cutting the agencies indeed saves only a little. However, those agencies either push a big spending program, or used to justify big spending program.
    For private coaching (IM, four times VIC champion) call or SMS 0417519733
    Computer tells you what to play. Good coach explains why.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Worst Australian Prime Ministers
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Politics
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 07-01-2019, 07:45 PM
  2. Australian Prime Ministers
    By antichrist in forum Politics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 21-10-2018, 06:27 PM
  3. Best Australian Prime Ministers
    By Kevin Bonham in forum Politics
    Replies: 187
    Last Post: 01-03-2018, 06:39 AM
  4. European migration issues (sf Tony Abbott)
    By Capablanca-Fan in forum Politics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 27-01-2016, 12:40 PM
  5. Tony Abbott
    By antichrist in forum Politics
    Replies: 273
    Last Post: 07-04-2013, 11:55 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •