Home > Regular Features > Monday Message Board

Monday Message Board

June 22nd, 2009

Its time once again for Monday Message Board. Post comments on any topic. As usual, civilised discussion and no coarse language.

Categories: Regular Features Tags:
  1. Chris Warren
    June 22nd, 2009 at 08:49 | #1

    Now look at poor old Yankee capitalism. I suppose the growing official list of banks failures says it all.

    see Failed Banks

  2. Salient Green
    June 22nd, 2009 at 10:13 | #2

    Yankee capitalism is like Bernie in ‘Weekend at Bernies’. Can you see the bankers as the two losers, dragging dead old capitalism around, dressed up to look alive, propping it up because it’s continually flopping over, and never noticing the smell?

  3. June 22nd, 2009 at 12:51 | #3

    Preview was extremely slow for me last night, but is working fine today.

  4. June 22nd, 2009 at 20:25 | #4

    What preview? I see no preview button. Or is it some javascript based thing? I generally disable that precisely in order to avoid being slowed down; a javascript real time preview is bound to suffer from slowness and possibly from being an imperfect preview too, since it is not in actual fact the output of the same code routines that go to generating a comment from the submit button, going through the same browser context that determines how that eventually appears.

  5. June 23rd, 2009 at 00:37 | #5

    Regardless of the immediate political outcomes, the “utegate affair” has at least, if only for day, made debate in the House of Representatives the focus of attention.

  6. June 23rd, 2009 at 02:01 | #6

    And proceedings of Senate committees too.

  7. Alice
    June 23rd, 2009 at 21:18 | #7

    But wait for it …

    JH in the smh today (letters to th editor) bleating on about Hartcher – of all people!!! Claims he (Howard) NEVER blocked Costello and did a better job of the economy which, under his leadership, “left behind an economy which placed Australia in a better position in which to weather the financial storms of recent times than any other nation”…and “Australia was stronger, prouder, and a more prosperous nation in November 2007 than when the Keating govt was defeated in March 1996.”

    Pardon me while I throw up.

    Yes, he steered us all into a boom of monumenmtal proportions with few interest rate brakes and no fiscal contractions …to the edge of the precipice and over…and vacated before his false ideogies were exposed. How convenient. He sold off profitable public income streams from public sector owned entities (like AIDC) through false ideology when the economy was booming – good price but very bad policy. What remains now to restore the surplus Mr Howard – what sound underpinnings of constant profitable public income streams? Gone.

    Yes Mr Howard did a great job…he had it easy in great times…but he left no fat, no income streams, no legacy when the private sector fails us all, no backstop in public sector employment or income revenues.

    But according to Howard he did a great job because all he compares himself to is a long gone rival (Keating) and I wonder of Costello agrees?

    The sheer ego. Lucky he has his family. Thanks for nothing.

  8. SeanG
    June 23rd, 2009 at 21:50 | #8

    Net assets rather than net debt; a strong and viable banking system; lower tax rates; flexible working arrangements… yes, Howard did nothing.

  9. Alice
    June 23rd, 2009 at 22:04 | #9

    Howard and flexible working arrangements? Did the peoplem like it SeanG? Maybe Howard should have experimnted on his gardner, wife and kids to see how they liked it before he launched his social experiemnt on the Australian working population… chances are his family would have told him to forget about it.

  10. SeanG
    June 23rd, 2009 at 23:59 | #10

    You know he was in power for 11 years and introduced more than just Workchoices as a way of deregulating the workplace. He might have done a bridge too far but he got pretty far, Alice.

    Maybe when we re-regulate our workplaces and structural unemployment rises and youth can’t get jobs because it is too expensive to hire them you will see the light!

  11. Alice
    June 24th, 2009 at 10:39 | #11

    Howard started off incredibly popular – by the end he was one of Australia’s most unpopular prime ministers, losing his own seat. I think that says it all Sean. He certainly wont be recorded in the history books as winning any popularity contest with the Australian people. He got pretty far as you say only because of his senate majority in a direction the Australian people didnt want to go. Many more people ended up being treated unfairly where it hurts most – where they work and in their hip pocket. There is nothing to show for his wondrous budget surplus now except degraded and disrupted public services with a lot less public assets to cushion the budget in a downswing like we have now. He only got that budget surplus with sale after sale of government assets anyway. Unemployment rose anyway under Howard, when you take underemployment and casualisation into account. The unemployment number is sheer nonsense. Inequality did nothing but rise and rise under Howard and I doubt he even looked at those numbers once (after all he thought the source of inequality was individual lack of a work ethic didnt he?).

    However what amazes me is ex prime ministers who bother to write to the opinion pages of the SMH a letter seeking to advertise their own skills as leaders – another overblown ego (time to retire). Keating does exactly the same thing from time to time.

    Is it a feature of all ex prime ministers that, in their own mind’s eye, they were the best leaders a country ever had?

  12. Dave McRae
    June 24th, 2009 at 11:35 | #12

    The Taxonomy of Delusion post I found to be most interesting! The comments there are closed but I wish to add another data point to the irresponsible contrarian. In this weeks NewScientist there’s an article on the HIV/AIDS denialism
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227131.500-aids-denial-a-lethal-delusion.html?full=true&print=true

    The Lindzen like character in this group of psuedoscience is a Peter Duesberg, once a respected researcher, now a key member of that mob

    From the NewScientist link
    [quote] “He looked me dead in the eyes and said this is not an infectious disease,” he says. “I have no question that he really believes this. He ignores the science to retain this belief.”

    Why? In Kalichman’s opinion: “In that very small circle of AIDS denialism, he’s a rock star. He was the focus of attention the whole time and he was very comfortable with that.”[/quote]

    (I hope the quote format works – the preview seems a little out of whack on my firefox browser)

  13. SeanG
    June 24th, 2009 at 18:50 | #13

    Alice,

    If he was so unpopular, how do you suppose he won election after election? He was a popular leader, more popular than his party was but he went up against a tide of people wanting change and an ever more popular leader in Rudd.

Comments are closed.