I don't disagree with you here, I just don't see the lack of fixed terms as a solution. The major parties will still be sourcing candidates from law firms and unions. 

They have nothing in common with every day people you're exactly right. 

For once I agree with you. You provided numerous examples of things they don't have to deal with that the common person loses sleep over.

To add to it, they also don't have budgets so to speak. For them, budgets are just numbers on a ledger. For real people like you and I, if we go over budget, we either don't get paid, get an absolute reaming from the Client or lose future work from it. It's little surprise our economy seems to be a disaster constantly. 

In regards to the budget I think you have oversimplified what they need to consider. Slashing money on the main expenses in government would be education, law, health and social welfare. All matters that most people feel are underfunded, but as long as the books balance it doesn't matter right?? Subsequently most costs in these areas would be employees, so let's make sure we fire people to make budget ... oh but then we have to pay them welfare, oh increases unemployment, oh holds up private enterprise, oh less people spending money (paying taxes), oh increases inflation etc. etc.

So yes it would be great if the country could reign in their budget but not a simple matter of just balancing the books (as there are millions of lives at risk).

I guess the best analogy I have ever heard in regards to government budgets / debts is a home mortgage. There is "good" and "bad" debt. Bad debt may be getting a loan to pay for a new flat-screen TV (short sighted policies based we no long term benefit ... which of course lots are made by government) but good debt may be getting a home loan (long term investment for long term stability and benefit ... which should be what mode the budget should be for, and I'd argue large portions are). The issue is ensuring that these "good" debt decisions are not sacrificed for "bad" debt decisions by government. Short political terms in Australia tend to lean towards "bad" debt decisions, as many times the succeeding governments will "benefit" from "good" debt decisions, so current governments are not willing to make long term investments because the fruit is not reaped during their tenure.

Oh of course but lets not pretend like excessive red tape and wastage is not rife in all levels of government. Your analogy is fine to but efficiency I guess is an issue. I'm involved with several government related projects a year and none of them are ever completed on time or on budget. We also have to suffer delays due to various phases of government bureaucracy and the staggering incompetence of the government workforce, all costing money.  

As for government employees, that's one of the huge issues I see every couple of days. Should we play blokes $85k a year to sit in a car and talk on their phone on work sites to keep them off welfare? hmmm......

Waste regardless, $250k + Union undisclosed spend on a big ask as quoted.
Being a winner money spent is always justified for any team.

Some very good real world points Muz.
Just like way back then with Don Chipp from the Democrats - Keeping the Bastards Honest.
At least they had a credible model and he as leader understood the big picture, many after him lost the plot hence their demise and the Greens prospered but they and others are pathetic in the big picture.
Same goes for both the major parties sadly today tbh BUT just like I said upon the Rudd win, you got what you wanted now pay for it, doesn't effect me as much as others but be careful what you wish for, IF ever that useless moron Shorten gets in good luck to youse lol........

If only we had more Elon Musks in the world and less LNP governments:

http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/thats-a-record-south-australias-tesla-battery-responds-to-coalfired-plant-failure/news-story/d9e02c0dbf6774ffea948a1b919f3b7f 

lol agreed BETHC, like this here in the news today

Science on the outer after Malcolm Turnbull's Cabinet reshuffle

Updated about 8 hours ago

Malcolm Turnbull's extensive frontbench reshuffle has seen science left on the outer, with the portfolio shunted from Cabinet and assigned to a junior minister.

The move has dismayed Australia's scientific community, which has been frustrated by a succession of changes to the important post.

With the former minister for science, Arthur Sinodinos, stepping down due to ill health, the Prime Minister dropped the role from Cabinet and allocated it to an Assistant Minister, ACT senator Zed Seselja.

"We would much prefer to have a minister sitting at the Cabinet table," said Professor Emma Johnston, the president of Science and Technology Australia (STA), representing the nation's scientific and research associations.

"Putting that science, that fundamental research, into an Assistant Minister's portfolio demotes it, makes it less of a priority, and words matter."

Senator Seselja will be assisting the Minister for Jobs and Innovation, Michaelia Cash, and believes the arrangements show innovation is still central to the Coalition's agenda.

"[Malcolm Turnbull] put it front and centre for the Government," Senator Seselja said.

"We've got the new portfolio led by Michaelia Cash and Craig Laundy, which is really about jobs. Jobs and innovation."

Multiple portfolio changes cause problems, STA says

It is only the second time since the 1930s there has not been a minister for science in cabinet, with Mr Turnbull's predecessor Tony Abbott also dropping science from cabinet.

Compounding concerns is the rapid turnover of science ministers in recent years, with Senator Seselja the fourth in the past three years.

"Having multiple portfolio changes does cause problems," Professor Johnston said.

"They've individually been very excited and talented people, but the instability does cause problems for the sector.

"Science and research are long-term programs. They pay off, but you need to invest in them and you need to invest in them securely."

The Opposition spokesman for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, Kim Carr, said the demotion puts science and research in the hands of "a third-rate junior".

He said the science community needs an advocate at the Cabinet table and that shouldn't be "turned on and off like a tap".

STA want to see science at the heart of government decision-making.

"It's paramount that anyone with the science portfolio is committed to evidence-based policy creation," Professor Johnston said.

Senator Seselja is a conservative Liberal who was a vocal opponent of carbon pricing under the last Labor government.

But he said climate change policy would not fall under his purview.

"I'm not going to get into the absolute detail of that — it is beyond my portfolio," he said.

"But I think the direction the Government is going in is absolutely the right one."

-PB

Only the second time since 1930 that there hasn't been a science minister in the Cabinet, the only other time was under Tony Abbott.

Oh and the Senator they gave it to is super conservative, but it's ok because he talks to Mickey Cash a lot. 

I'm sure that'll work a treat.

-PB

Yep, Labor shouldn't have spent around 1/3 of what the Lieberals to give the people of Bennelong a viable alternative in our democracy. Absolute waste.

Isn't Kristina Keneally a dirty Sky News hack who's 1 step removed from being a LNP mouth piece anyway haha? 

Yep, perfect ALP candidate 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/01/the-curious-star-appeal-of-jordan-peterson/

Aus politics?

That debate with Cathy Newman was kinda hilarious.

-PB

and below was mcjules on her being the Bennelong candidate : Yep, Labor shouldn't have spent around 1/3 of what the Lieberals to give the people of Bennelong a viable alternative in our democracy. Absolute waste.     
What a champion response and wait for the next pearla comeback but whatever :)

What are you on about? :laugh: Apart from being on Sky News none of what was written was accurate :laugh:

you quoted the above - I see nothing about sky here but quoted that she's a viable alternative.
Thats what I'm on about nothing more or less.
Are you relying on what is quoted in the press being based in SA and you know for fact nothing is accurate lol........

What exactly makes her not a viable alternative. Is she not an experienced and competent politician?

You think she is a competent pollie with vast experience based on what to date ?
Party room attrition moved up the ranks in quick time ?
Being on sky news since '14 ?
Labour and not Liebaral or xyz party other than your pref  :)



 

I'd fuck her.

Literally LOL'd.

:w00t: LOL.....

What absolute garbage. Can't strike if it affects the economy? That's the whole point of a strike...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-25/sydney-train-strike-cannot-go-ahead,-fair-work-commission-rules/9361270

A 2.75% ANNUAL pay increase is asking a lot. I can't think of any private industries who would guarantee an annual pay increase.

It is difficult not to feel like they're asking for a lot. 

Yup, that's the whole point of strike action bring the bargaining chip.

Too bad if everyond calls in sick on Monday lol

-PB

I'm usually very supportive of the greens but damn they gone full retard lately. Fucking nimbly fucktards

Haha haven't been paying much attention what have they done?

Wish Mal had fired Barnaby via Twitter.

USA leading the way yet again.

-PB

Me too