Punch on: Open thread 02/01/2013

Gratuitous Adviser says:

08:46am | 02/01/13

There is nothing “eventual” about it.  It’s called Bankstown (and district).  All the pollies know about it but are too embarrassed to acknowledge the disastrous policies of the past, and present, that created such a place.  They just gutlessly leave it for the Police and future generations to handle while they buy Circular Quay fast food shops.  No wonder Keating moved.

Jaqui says:

09:14am | 02/01/13

You mean like Australians participating in the invasion of the Transvaal and Orange Free State in the Boer war?
Or their involvement in the British creation of the concentration camp to wholesale starve Afrikaner men, women and children to death?

People in glass houses and all that.

Hartz says:

09:23am | 02/01/13

Ah yes but that would mean shaking off the shackles of Political Correctness, and we can’t have that…. We give away our citizenship far too easily and we don’t rescind it when necessary…!!

Gav says:

12:51pm | 02/01/13

@ Jaqui - The Boer War? Trolling much?

Markus says:

01:51pm | 02/01/13

“You mean like Australians participating in the invasion of the Transvaal and Orange Free State in the Boer war?”
Seeing as Australia was still just a collection of British colonies for the whole first Boer war and most of the second, and that none of the Australians who served would have been Afrikaaners, I would say no, not like that, in any way.

OverIt says:

09:47am | 02/01/13

Dr Goh, the majority of Australian universities offering Medicine do not offer the course to undergraduates, therefore students must first gain another degree.  This does not have to be science-based, although of course to gain a good GAMSAT score the student will have to have a good knowledge of science.  Many students during this time choose to study Medical Science, which of course can lead to career choices other than the practice of medicine.  A significant number of those who gain this degree will not initially be offered a place on a course in Medicine, due to not attaining a high enough GAMSAT score, or not performing well at interview.  While some choose to try again until they finally gain a place, others choose to apply their knowledge in other areas, research being a major one.  So, although perhaps not their initial choice, it is highly likely that some of these high-achieving students will end up enjoying a career in medical research, to the benefit of us all.

Dr B S Goh, Australian in Asia says:

11:12am | 02/01/13

@ OverIt. Thanks for updating me on what’s happening at entrance to medicine in Oz unis. I was prompted to write my previous post because the top student in NSW is trying to choose between two unis, one offering an undergraduate course in medicine and the other as a postgraduate course.

I am urging the top students at high schools heading for medicine to study an undergraduate course with strong maths like engineering, physics, chemistry or maths.

Can you give us your views why the top Asian students at high schools in Oz want to study medicine? My opinion is that it may be a colonial effect of the British empire.  I do not see top students at high schools in other Asian countries wanting to study medicine.

Al says:

07:22am | 02/01/13

PJ, I may just be ignorant of the facts but what are you refering too by the ‘Government just cannot bring itself to spend $738 million over four years on a single Australian mother and her child’?

yeah-no says:

07:42am | 02/01/13

Who are the lucky single mother and child you expect the government to spend $738M on?

JS says:

07:46am | 02/01/13

why does an australian mother and her child need $738 million?

gary says:

08:04am | 02/01/13

“this Government just cannot bring itself to spend $738 million over four years on a single Australian mother and her child?”

Is spending this much on a single mother and her child an Abbott policy? Where will the money come from babble-on? If each single mother and her child receives $738 million, we will go broke very quickly - A conservative fiscal cliff if ever I heard of one.

“As for the omission of some facts, we have gotten used to that since 2010. “

Well babble-on, you were reading the Herald Sun. You should be used to reading fact free papers by now.

Chris L says:

08:11am | 02/01/13

“As for the omission of some facts” - such as the fact that most of that 1600 strong “PR Spin army” had the same jobs under Howard.

Achmed says:

08:14am | 02/01/13

We should just go with Abbott’s plan to suspend unemployment benefits for people aged under 30

Tim says:

08:42am | 02/01/13

It was so relaxing not having to read PJ’s lies and half truths over the break.

Isn’t it funny that come 2nd January he’s back posting away. Someone might even think that he was simply returning to work.

PJ says:

09:11am | 02/01/13

ah it hurts to be a supporter of a failing Government.

- $738 million over 4 years on 84,000 single mums. Scrapped.
- $1.7 Billion,  $30 Million, One off on 13000 illegal immigrants, 90% male. Preferred.

I know, it’s awful that your favoured political party shows contempt for it’s mainstream working class voters. Bogans, I think you call them.

Over the past 5 years just over 1 million jobs created, but 53.6% of those given to imported overseas workers on a Gillard government 457 visa. The Monash University report was hard reading for those that thought the working classes were better served by a Labor movement.

Now we have 84,000 single Mums forced to live on the bread line whilst failed Border controls force record spending on illegal immigration.

There is no evidence that Howard had a 1600 strong Spin Doctor army, but there is that this Gillard Government has one.

http://www.2ue.com.au/blogs/2ue-blog/150m-to-sell-you-political-spin/20120813-243fn.html

http://theaustralian.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx

We’ve never known the trust of it since 2010.

Sandman says:

09:41am | 02/01/13

@pj
I read it in the funny papers, it must be true.

PsychoHyena says:

09:54am | 02/01/13

@PJ, I’m confused, majority of Liberal supporters actually call for this kind of thing to occur (scrapping of welfare payments) and as you appear to be a Liberal supporter you should be championing this or is it because Labour are doing it and not the Liberals? They could always cut the public service, resulting in more unemployment, reduced efficiency of the public service and increasing the burden on the Australian public, oh and with a reduced income those public servants would rein back their spending causing further hassle for an already struggling retail sector and the value of rental properties will fall as fewer people are receiving incomes and the number of available jobs will also decrease.

Slashing public sector jobs is like using duct tape on a leaky pipe, a short-term solution with near immediate effect but doesn’t address underlying budget issues.

I don’t agree with the proposal on the surface (how it’s being reported) but really once your youngest child is 8-yo or older you should be in a position to be able to look for work.

Al says:

09:59am | 02/01/13

PJ - Quit with the ‘1600 strong Spin Doctor army’, you do realise that that number includes the Public Relations officers for EVERY Federal government department and these have been around with slight fluctuations in the numbers since each department came into being. The more recent increases can easily be explained by the expanding scope of the media that they need to cover. They are also employed to provide the views of each department, and on governemnt policy (which at this time happens to be the labour party) but you will find that most were also employed in the same type of position under previous governments and will likely continue under future governments whoever they are. It is a BS number that misrepresents what they actualy do.
As for ‘$738 million over 4 years on 84,000 single mums. Scrapped.’ wasn’t this a cahnge in the structure to welfare payments to ENCOURAGE single parents (not necasarily mothers) to return to the workforce, giving them benefits comparable to every other unemployed person?

Economist says:

11:16am | 02/01/13

Context please PJ. From my understanding but I’m sure you can elaborate, well maybe not, Labor have made two changes to 457 visa rules in 2009 and 2012. In 2009 they expanded the number of occupations for the visa and tightened up on wages and entitlements. I don’t believe they changed the rules that require some evidence by employers that they have tried filling the positions with locals first and foremost. Secondly they simplified the process in 2012 making it easier for permanent residency.

I’m not sure what your problem is. People on 457 visas pay taxes locally. Created jobs were filled. I’m sure those in Labor on the left object to 457 visas, but the government is listening to business and their needs, damned if you do damned if you don’t. Are you claiming the Liberals would repeal these changes or even 457 themselves? I think you’re dreaming. Some understanding of the history rather than the usual cut and paste from reports critical of the government without context would be appreciated, perhaps that could be your new years resolution, to understand what your claiming?

Regarding spin as already highlighted these positions have been around for a long time. I still think you’ll find the largest ever spend on spin was in response to the unions anti-Workchoices campaign where the Liberals spent a record $121 million on advertising to counter the campaign http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/work-choices-ads-cost-121m/story-e6frg6n6-1111114652423 , the largest ever spend on a single policy. Comparatively the NBN spend is $20M and carbon tax $16B, to date from what I can find.

Regarding the cut backs on Parenting payments, sure its a cynical move to cut back on some welfare affecting 86,000 single parent HH, rather than tackling the real middle class welfare problem of family benefits which would affect a larger cohort of voters. I’m also sure that for these parents they will face a higher effective marginal tax rate as they attain more employment, however they are still in receipt of Family tax benefits A and B and in many cases child support payments. They’re also receving a lump sum for each child attending school. While this won’t make up for the short fall I’m not convinced by some of the claim by welfare rights advocates.

Economist says:

11:22am | 02/01/13

Context please PJ. From my understanding but I’m sure you can elaborate, well maybe not, Labor have made two changes to 457 visa rules in 2009 and 2012. In 2009 they expanded the number of occupations for the visa and tightened up on wages and entitlements. I don’t believe they changed the rules that require some evidence by employers that they have tried filling the positions with locals first and foremost. Secondly they simplified the process in 2012 making it easier for permanent residency.

I’m not sure what your problem is. People on 457 visas pay taxes locally. Created jobs were filled. I’m sure those in Labor on the left object to 457 visas, but the government is listening to business and their needs, damned if you do damned if you don’t. Are you claiming the Liberals would repeal these changes or even 457 themselves? I think you’re dreaming. Some understanding of the history rather than the usual cut and paste from reports critical of the government without context would be appreciated, perhaps that could be your new years resolution, to understand what your claiming?

Regarding spin as already highlighted these positions have been around for a long time. I still think you’ll find the largest ever spend on spin was in response to the unions anti-Workchoices campaign where the Liberals spent a record $121 million on advertising to counter the campaign http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/work-choices-ads-cost-121m/story-e6frg6n6-1111114652423 , the largest ever spend on a single policy. Comparatively the NBN spend is $20M and carbon tax $16B, to date from what I can find.

Regarding the cut backs on Parenting payments, sure it’s a cynical move to cut back on some welfare affecting 86,000 single parent HH, rather than tackling the real middle class welfare problem of family benefits which would affect a larger cohort of voters. I’m also sure that for these parents they will face a higher effective marginal tax rate as they attain more employment, however they are still in receipt of Family tax benefits A and B and in many cases child support payments. They’re also receiving a lump sum for each child attending school. While this won’t make up for the short fall I’m not convinced by some of the claim by welfare rights advocates.

Meh says:

02:18pm | 02/01/13

New Year. Same old troll.

Yawn.

PJ says:

04:42pm | 02/01/13

Temporary workers… from The Australian ..... “The immigration settings are all based on boom conditions and there’s been no adjustment for the dramatic slowdown in the work market.”

a case in point
“The Monash study shows that 58,000 new jobs were created in the year to August, but 100,000 migrants arrived and found work during the same period.”

There is not a significant job market out there for single Mothers with children. And what there is for single mothers is dominated by an influx of cheap temporary workers, who will be preferred to single mothers requiring flexible woking hours to meet child commitments.

another case in point.
“Youth unemployment has soared 80 per cent in the 20 to 24-year age group since the start of the economic downturn, rising from 4.5 per cent in June 2008 to 8.1 per cent in June this year.” - The Australian

Read the Monash University report.

That the Gillard Government has a care for the working class is a total myth. They are being sacrificed for Mass Immigration set to a boom setting, no question. And the future for many is to languish on the dole.

PJ says:

04:57pm | 02/01/13

Economist

The Gillard Government allows immigration matters to be dealt with by Employers.

From the CFMEU site “Some (457 workers) are forced to endure poor living conditions and live in fear of being sent home if they complain.”

Mass immigration creates an Employers resource market. Lots of cheap labour to exploit.

There are loads of agencies operating in our cities that offer Overseas workers directly to order….. “We provide all relevant immigration advice and visa application processing” .... “provide an end-to-end service.”

Temporary workers are offered to Australian business, by these agencies, on a very compelling business case. They are cheaper.

Have a look at the Daily Telegraph.co.uk and google some of the Australian jobs and you will see, some of these jobs are elementary, basic entry level and that they are simultaneously advertised in Australia and overseas.

When the Gillard Government was stating that Australians were skill less, lazy and unwilling to travel for work, it’s very own Job Board showed 27,000 Australians had registered for interstate Mining jobs.

yeah-no says:

07:36am | 02/01/13

Yes, there’s something that may be news to you. All political parties lie (or break promises, technically not a lie). It goes with the job. Most of us realise that and don’t pretend that it’s restricted to one party. Why not join us?

Jaqui says:

09:40am | 02/01/13

@yeah-no: Except that some actually tell the truth from time to time and act in the best interest of the country instead of their own. This Labor government has no interest in Australians or the future of Australia, one thing that is certain, whatever they promise, expect the opposite.

“There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead!”
“Bringing the budget back into surplus in 2012”

mel says:

12:12pm | 02/01/13

Jaqui, could you perhaps name those politicians who you think “actually tell the truth from time to time and act in the best interest of the country instead of their own”?

I, and I think many of us here, would be interested to find out who are these political paragons of virtue.

Jaqui says:

01:53pm | 02/01/13

@mel: Anyone but Gillard, she couldn’t lie straight in bed that one!

PW says:

02:58pm | 02/01/13

Jacqui-

If you please, the thought of Ms Gillard in the boudoir is one I can well do without. And I may well even vote for her.

yeah-no says:

07:33am | 02/01/13

What’s a cache, and how is it cleared?

Joan says:

07:58am | 02/01/13

“Disallowed Key Strokes” gee and I thought it was a Punch ban on my comments. Comments like Macklin reckons living on $35 per day is a breeze.  You bet the tax payer pays more than $35 per day to keep Gillard hair cut, coloured,  in place and madeup   - you can always spot the difference when Tim’s not about. - like Gillard meet up with the cricketers.

PJ says:

09:13am | 02/01/13

ha ha sounds like it only effects those that do not worship Julia Gillard.

Tory, should we be paranoid?

iansand says:

10:14am | 02/01/13

If it helps, when I get the disallowed key strokes message I also get the compatibility view icon to the right of my address bar.  IE.

iansand says:

10:16am | 02/01/13

And if you click on that icon the problem usually (not always) disappears.

yeah maybe says:

12:17pm | 02/01/13

PJ
you should just be happy it doesn’t have a bullshit detector.
You wouldn’t get a post through.

Philosopher says:

09:29am | 02/01/13

Thanks Dr Goh, however I’ve already learned the best survival tip for dealing with crowd crushes (also for buffaloes, crocodiles and muggers)... thanks, Mick Dundee! A true Aussie legend.

TimB says:

08:45am | 02/01/13

Try reading Bob Ellis for some true comedy.

The bubble of unreality that man lives in is hysterical.

You know he truly believes that Labor will gain significant votes in NSW because of O’Farrell’s decision to tear down the monorail? Apparently this policy is a grievous affront to the people of Western Sydney. It seems that our biggest concern in life is the availability of a novelty mass-transport system for the occasions we venture from suburbia into the heart of the city.  Thus will the backlash deliver NSW back into the steady hands of the ALP.

You couldn’t make it up.

Sallyfixedthetoaster says:

09:05am | 02/01/13

@TimB
“You couldn’t make it up. “
and yet ......
you just did.

TimB says:

10:17am | 02/01/13

‘and yet ......
you just did. ‘

Err, no I didn’t. Why would you think that? Unless you’re a moron.

“And though it is not yet safe, the Labor vote will be returning soon, when the wrecker’s ball goes into the Monorail, in even Sydney’s western suburbs. “

http://www.ellistabletalk.com/2012/12/27/the-usual-murdoch-dirty-tricks-73-labor-to-win-in-queensland-probably-even-queensland-newspoll-decrypted-shows/

Sallyfixedthetoaster says:

12:12pm | 02/01/13

“Err, no I didn’t. Why would you think that? Unless you’re a moron.”

errr
You must be a moron if you got
“You know he truly believes that Labor will gain significant votes in NSW because of O’Farrell’s decision to tear down the monorail?  from that quote.
but we already knew that.

Christine says:

08:50am | 02/01/13

Make up your mind. I thought Labour supporters claimed he didn’t have any policies. Besides it should be the party that has policies not the leader, who is usually the spokesperson.  Australia is not a dictatorship country. (I hope)

As for the plan you referred to how about a little less misrepresentation and scare tactics and a few more facts, meaning the qualifications that went with that statement. e.g. did it not refer to people living in areas where work was available, but some preferred not to work. i.e.  Are there not unemployed living in fruit growing regions where the farmers find it difficult to secure workers.

Jaqui says:

09:21am | 02/01/13

Hey look over there!

Seriously The Punch, how about in 2013 you start moderating based on this infantile diversionary tactic.

PsychoHyena says:

03:19pm | 02/01/13

@Christine, but that’s the same with what has happened with the Parenting Payment. Are we forgetting that in a two-parent household that the non-working parent has to go onto unemployment benefits rather than parenting payment - partnered once their youngest child reaches 6? That was Howard Government legislation, why should single parents be treated differently?

@Jacqui, so there is discussion about changing the welfare system and the mention of the Opposition’s stance on welfare is a diversionary tactic? So what if Achmed had said that the Opposition was going to increase the $ value of welfare payments and increase the number of people it applied to, would it still be diversionary?

Both sides of politics are playing the game of ‘Yeah we’re bad, but they’re worse’.

iansand says:

09:37am | 02/01/13

It sounds like the same ideas as Paul Kennedy’s The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers.  I haven’t read it for a while, but a couple of things that struck me were the acceleration of the collapse of empires and the inexorable connection between economic strength and political power.  Wikipedia gives a summary here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Great_Powers Kennedty was remarkably prescient.

Yorkey says:

01:19pm | 02/01/13

I decided to read Political Animal The Making of Tony Abbott while catching the train from Adelaide to Melbourne for New Years. He is after all likely to be our next PM. I encourage those who have not done so to read it. He does sound like a capable minister for the Howard government and ran the Health portfolio well. But his values and morals during his days of university politics are frightening. He is keeping his cards much closer to his chest these days but I don’t believe a leopard changes his spots. In his case he would need a complete species transformation before he could be prime minister material. I hope the Liberal Party have the sense to replace him this year with a more fair and tolerant leader.

iansand says:

10:12am | 02/01/13

I’ve read this before.

sexist texts says:

10:18am | 02/01/13

Brough, Pyne and Bishop being charged with sedition?

Other than that, you’ve generated a list the telegraph would be proud of.
More fiction from the funny pages babble-on

Trevora says:

10:38am | 02/01/13

Seems like the shit unit at Liberal HQ is still rehashing last years posts.

Gets boring what they need is some policies of their own.

yeah-no says:

02:03pm | 02/01/13

I wouldn’t know if I’ve read this before because I never get through more than 2 lines of party political posts.

yeah-no says:

02:03pm | 02/01/13

I wouldn’t know if I’ve read this before because I never get through more than 2 lines of party political posts.

Meh says:

02:23pm | 02/01/13

You think wrong, pj, as usual.

Sundress In Sydney says:

11:40am | 02/01/13

I am guessing “All I Need Is The Air That I breathe”  simply because I can’t remember anything else they did.

Elphaba says:

01:56pm | 02/01/13

@Sundress - Nope

Michael says:

02:29pm | 02/01/13

The Mighty Quinn…

PW says:

02:54pm | 02/01/13

He Aint Heavy He’s My Brother

pa_kelvin says:

04:29pm | 02/01/13

I Can’t let go…