Popular Entries
|
Thursday, November 8. 2007Senate Group tickets: VictoriaTrackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
For some reason you have linked all the parties to their websites except the Liberty and Democracy Party (LDP). So here is the website:-
http://ldp.org.au It is interesting that you call us right-wing. We have been called left-wing by lots of people because we support things like:- 1. Same sex-marriage. 2. Marijuana re-legalisation. 3. Euthanasia. Ours is a philosophy of both economic and civil freedom. I don't think it is fair to call us right-wing, although we also support free speech and property rights so we also think you can of course say what you like on your blog. Regards, Terje Petersen LDP senate candidate - NSW
Hi, thanks for your comments. Leaving out your website was an oversight; my apologies - I did actually look it up, but it looks like sleep was catching up with me when I finally posted the entry.
I've fixed it, now. I do applaud your socially liberal policies, however it's your economic policies - particularly taxation, health, labour and welfare that led me to my conclusion on your position on the - admittedly arbitrary - political scale.
Paul, I believe that it was my first year Economics 1A lecturer who said that politics was merely applied economics. Therefore, we can disregard the Terje's points as aberrations. Remember, such groups as the Log-Cabin Republicans do exist.
Paul,
If you focus purely on the economics we do appear right wing. However the world is not all about economics. On the issue of economics please consider a few quick point:- First Point. In 1996 the average Australian paid $8500 for federal government (2007 equivalent dollars). In 2007 the average Australian pays $11500 for federal government (more if you include GST). We pay 34% more for a service bundle (ie federal government) that few people regard as 34% better. Why is it so? Second Point. In many remote communities in Australia the unemployment rate is in double digits. And yet anybody that starts a business in one of these communities that requires them to employ people at $10 per hour is commiting a federal crime. Why is it so? Regards, Terje.
$10 per hour is a pittance. No-one can live on that, and business should not be allowed to take advantage of desperate people by making them work at such a low rate - which is why it is illegal.
If a business has a job they want someone to do, they can damned well pay for it properly, or do it themselves. As for cutting taxes, the problem is not taxation levels, it's lack of spending, as demonstrated by the huge surpluses and disintegrating infrastructure and services. Any tax cut at this stage risks worse inflation and higher interest rates, and would be utterly irresponsible.
Terje's maths is shithouse. Assuming an average rate of inflation of 3% (pretty much correct) between 1996 and 2007, and assuming wages keep up with inflation (which they have done - Workchoices is very new), Terje's $11,500 figure should reall be about $11,700.
Sorry for posting twice Paul, but to be clear, Terje appears to think that government taxation shouldn't keep up with inflation. Terje, you're an idiot. Second point is well covered by you, Paul.
Who spends money more carefully? The person who earnt it (individual taxpayers) or the government?
Nobody spends someone else's money as carefully as they spend their own. Hence, on the one hand we have a government department dedicated to combating global warming, and on the other we have a department figuring out how to subsidise fossil fuel companies that contribute to climate change! Government departments work against each other all the time, it's very silly if you think about it. The LDP has a real chance of getting a Senator up in NSW due to our preference deals and we’d appreciate if anyone reading this could chip in $10 by signing this pledge: http://www.pledgebank.com/donate4freedom Even if you don't agree with all our policies, a libertarian voice in parliament would provide balance.
There seems to be some concern about my maths. So let me be clear.
In 2007 dollar terms (ie already having adjusted for inflation) the cost of federal government was $8500 per capita in 1996 and is $11500 today. You don't need to adjust for inflation when the numbers are already adjusted for inflation. You can watch our educational video on this topic if you want to review the methodology:- http://youtube.com/watch?v=5FidBATOQ_Y
Apologies, Terje. Subject to the below caveat, I withdraw my criticism about your figures.
Caveat: In your presentation, your $8000 figure adjusted for inflation became a fraction under $10,000. Exactly what inflation figure were you using? |
Calendar
Recent Entries
Blog AdministrationFurther ReadingLicence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||