Joe Hockey, Shrek and Other Misunderstood Ogres!
“This year the Australian government will spend on average over $6,000 on welfare for every man, woman and child in the country. Given that only around 45 per cent of the population pays income tax, the average taxpayer must pay more than twice this amount in tax to fund welfare expenditure.
“In other words, the average working Australian, be they a cleaner, a plumber or a teacher, is working over one month full-time each year just to pay for the welfare of another Australian. Is this fair?”
Joe Hockey
Ok, what’s the difference between Joe Hockey and Shrek?
Answer: One is a complete work of fiction and the other is green.
I’m trying to work out Joe’s figures in the above quote. If the average taxpayer has to pay twice $6,000 in tax to fund welfare expenditure ($12,000), how does that equate to say cleaner or a teacher or even a plumber working one month to pay for the welfare of another Australian? Is he suggesting that we pay $12,000 in tax every month? Or does he think that our wages are $12,000 a month.
Whatever way I look at it, it doesn’t make any sense at all. But I’m sure some Liberal supporter will have the answer and it’ll go something like this:
“Don’t you idiots realise that Labor broke the country and we have to do something to fix things, and this is something so you can’t criticise it!”
Of course, Joe did also complain that much of the criticism of his Budget was “political”.
Political? Imagine that! I mean, getting political is a terrible thing, isn’t it? Nobody should get political with the Budget…
I’m also intrigued as to when the media stopped demonising the government because people were unemployed and started blaming the unemployed themselves. After all, it’s the unemployed that chose to shut down the manufacturing sector and sack public servants. It’s the unemployed who make all the decisions about how the economy is structured. “Everyone who is capable should be working,” we’re now being told, as more and more decisions are made to create less and less jobs. I’d say something about easier rules on 457 visas, but Rupert finds that racist and disgusting. We only want stronger borders against asylum seekers.
But I’m more intrigued by the idea that the unemployed under 30 need to apply for forty jobs a month even in the six months before they start getting benefits. Or else they’ll have to wait another four weeks before being eligible for Newstart.
So this is how it works in practise. A person who is 26 and suddenly unemployed must spend what money they have – assuming they have savings – on photocopying resumes, stamps, stationery, internet access and various other items in order to make themselves eligible for the dole. Which – the Liberals are fond of telling us – should only be a temporary measure! If you run out of funds before you’re eligible, then you can never become eligible, because you’ll never have the money to meet the job application criteria.
Catch-22 had nothing on this.
Ah well, I guess some can move back in with their pensioner parents who had no cuts to their pension!
Still, this should be enough to make those under 30 demanding to be able to work for below the minimum wage. Anything rather than starve.
And Workchoices – which will was dead, buried and cremated – will become Zombie Workchoices. Or to give it the proper new name. Work(youhaveno)choice, you lazy bastard.
Read more articles from Rossleigh:
Abbott Government Declares Unity Ticket With Obama on Climate Change!
BALANCE OR MEN WHO STARES AT COATS
With Friends Like Bolt and Jones, You Don’t Need Enemas OR SNAFU
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
120 comments
Login here Register here-
leighton8 -
David Andrew Vallence -
Peter F -
John921Fraser -
Judith -
autcare -
John921Fraser -
Carol Taylor -
Terry2 -
Mike Wilkinson -
Liza Neil -
June M Bullivant Oam -
June M Bullivant Oam -
John921Fraser -
corvus boreus -
SunLight -
Ashlea -
John921Fraser -
Kathy Sutherland -
Lee -
Lee -
Lee -
Fred Martin -
Ashlea -
John921Fraser -
Ashlea -
SunLight -
Ashlea -
SunLight -
SunLight -
Lee -
John921Fraser -
SunLight -
SunLight -
Ashlea -
SunLight -
Ashlea -
Lee -
Ashlea -
Lee -
SunLight -
trishcorry -
OzFenric -
Jay -
SunLight -
OzFenric -
Bacchus -
Jay -
SunLight -
Lee -
Lee -
Neil -
SunLight -
Jay -
John921Fraser -
SunLight -
Lee -
SunLight -
SunLight -
SunLight -
SunLight -
SunLight -
SunLight -
mars08 -
corvus boreus -
corvus boreus -
Lee -
corvus boreus -
Lee -
Kaye Lee -
Lee -
Kaye Lee -
John921Fraser -
corvus boreus -
Kaye Lee -
Lee -
Möbius Ecko -
Lee -
Lee -
corvus boreus -
Kaye Lee -
Diannaart -
Ian -
Shelle -
mars08 -
Matthew Oborne -
corvus boreus -
mars08 -
corvus boreus -
Dan Rowden -
corvus boreus -
Bacchus -
Kaye Lee -
Möbius Ecko -
Bacchus -
Kaye Lee -
Kaye Lee -
Kaye Lee -
trevor -
corvus boreus -
Kaye Lee -
corvus boreus -
Terry2 -
Kaye Lee -
Matters Not -
Kaye Lee -
Matters Not -
Matters Not -
Kaye Lee -
Matters Not -
Kaye Lee -
trevor -
corvus boreus -
corvus boreus -
Matters Not -
corvus boreus -
Lee -
corvus boreus -
Lee -
James Darby
Return to home pageStraight to the chase …. I was vaguely wondering about that 6,000 dollar comment myself …..
what’s interesting is ….1. i work full time and am not aware of any welfare that i get from the government….i even checked my bank to see if there was some hidden money..there is no health care card in my name in this house..etc.
2. and people still believe in this government
I will believe Hockey when he tells how much it costs workers to subsidise the Miners fuel, and all other big business tax breaks. How many weeks will the average worker take to pay $50k to wealthy pregnant mothers.
Another way of looking at Hockey’s comment is that he is suggesting that the burden will fall on the ‘average worker’: in other words, he admits that , as far as he can see, the wealthy will not be contributing.
<
@RossLeigh
For dogs sake don't look any closer … because it gets even better/worse.
Take Townsville. …………..20% youth unemployment.
Qld. no assistance for unemployed on public transport.
"According to the Roy Morgan polling company, total unemployment hit 12.3 percent in February, with a staggering 28 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds jobless—a jump of 6.8 percentage points since January. An additional 16.1 percent of young workers were “under-employed”—wanting more work—a total of 44.1 percent either unemployed or underemployed."
They could move …. oh yeah …. where ?
How much tax does each of us pay to make up for those who move their money overseas to avoid tax? How much do we each pay towards the mining industry subsidies? How much will we each pay to support the ppl?
Let’s all give up our disabled kids to state care and see how much that costs tax payers, shall we?
<
@autcare
It might have to be threatened ….. and be prepared to carry thorough.
Pensioners threatened to march … and Abbott backed down, as well as State Premiers.
The thought of old people marching frightened the crap out of the LNP.
The
fairy talenarrative that Hockey has been trying to sell us (somewhat unsuccessfully) is that: Welfare means YOU! Look daggers at your neighbor if he’s unemployed/disabled/elderly because he’s costing YOU money. All the while snouts remain firmly in the trough at the top end of town.Curiouser and Curiouser : Mr Abbott has told President Obama that his tax indexation of Australian fuel ” acts as a carbon price signal to improve energy efficiency “.
https://www.businessspectator.com.au/news/2014/6/13/policy-politics/fuel-excise-carbon-tax-pm
So, it’s a carbon tax aimed at encouraging Australian motorists to use less fuel and thus reduce our carbon emissions. Now, I don’t claim to be real smart when it comes to this sort of thing but, the carbon tax that we are currently repealing was on major emitters like power stations and this indexation tax hits the motorist and lets the big polluters off. So, all those people who voted to elect this government because they didn’t like the carbon tax that they didn’t pay anyway, now have a carbon tax that they will have to pay : have I got this right, does anybody out there understand what this government is doing ?
Rossleigh : anything Hockey says has to be fact checked.
I understood him to mean that the average worker is working one month per annum basically for nothing to pay that months salary ($6,000} in tax to support someone on welfare. First bone of contention for me is that the average worker is on $72,000 per annum or more. Second is the implication is that if there were no welfare then we would not have to pay that $6,000 in tax… and that is never going to happen is it. Once again CHockey is appealing to greed by trying to create a divide between the gainfully employed and those on welfare… and he has the gall to talk about class warfare!
And why employ a 26 year-old overqualified Uni Grad when you can employ a 14 year-old runaway for almost nothing! At this rate we will be sending all our children down the pits and to the mines!
Hockey is clutching at straws, he thinks that we are idiots and we will swallow this trash, by the time he is finished our economy will have had it, because we are the ones who keep small business going and the tradies, the rich don’t do much of that, the way he is scaring us and taking money off us, we will be heading for a recession, due to the measures in the budget, no one is spending, one of my friends in business had 4 customers in 2 days, how long can that go on for without damage. Have a few months in the real world Mr Hockey.
Kevin Andrews stated today that the unemployed will not get benefits for 6 months and will be expected to apply for 40 jobs per month, with no money how are they going to do that.
<
@June M Bullivant Oam
Easy to see why Hockey is sweating it and has to gee himself up in Question Time, as well as giving speeches where he is assured of a warm welcome …. Uriah Heeps Sydney Institute.
Starve, steal or join the army.
Hockey is like a dog with a bone
And if you go near it, it will bite you hard
I wonder if they realise how many people can be working and paying income tax (be it a small amount) and receiving welfare. I have tax taken out of centrelink payments and I’m sure I’m not the only one.
<
@Ashlea
Abbotts gang don't care , they just tar everyone with the same brush.
Well, I had this silly idea that I live in a community, so I’m more than happy to contribute my taxes to support people who are having a rough trot. I think most people feel that way. Maybe Joe doesn’t understand?
Is the $6000 figure correct? I’ve tried looking for some stats but haven’t found any yet. What does Hokey classify as welfare? The taxpayers’ figures certainly don’t look right whichever way I look at them.
“Kevin Andrews stated today that the unemployed will not get benefits for 6 months and will be expected to apply for 40 jobs per month, with no money how are they going to do that.”
In some areas there wouldn’t even be 40 jobs per month advertised that someone with no qualifications or experience could do. How often before the same workplaces can be repeated? Who is going to monitor this? I have visions of someone printing out 40 letters and hand delivering them in a large shopping centre to meet their quota.
“And why employ a 26 year-old overqualified Uni Grad when you can employ a 14 year-old runaway for almost nothing!”
Where in Australia is it legal to employ anyone under the age of 15 years?
When Joe says welfare costs $6000 for every man woman and child is he talking all welfare?
Does the $6000 include include the cost of Aged pensions, Disability pensions, Child care rebates, Private health insurance rebates, tax concessions on Super for the wealthy, baby bonuses, pensioner concessions (oh no those have been defunded haven’t they), diesel fuel rebates to farmers and and miners, GST exemptions to farmers and businesses, etc. etc. is is it just unemployment benefits?
When he is apportioning the cost has he taken into account that not all the revenue the government gets comes from payee taxpayers, some comes from companies and businesses you know.
I have news for you Joe.
Your tactic of trying to turn tax paying children against their pensioner parents is not going to work.
@Lee, that’s when they start applying for jobs they have no chance of getting, and wasting everyone’s time/money. I used to love the job centres sending me for interviews for jobs that I didn’t meet the basic requirements for. Interview basically goes “yeah, I have no experience, can’t do anything you ask for, sorry for wasting your time since there are 20 other applicants”.
<
@Ashlea
I wonder if young people could sign up with 20 employment agencies and visit them every day.
That should make their day …. 200 people at their office door every day.
@John921Fraser
I wonder if anyone really signs up with them voluntarily though. I have heard no positive stories coming from a job centre, it is only done to shut centrelink up.
Those job centres are just talk feasts, for the ones that sit/ stand behind the desk
Are the only ones who get paid. Keeps the pen pushers in work that’s all
They do not help the unemployed, only feathering their own nest that’s all
@SunLight
I’ve had the fun of (just leaving) a job centre who didn’t believe me when I said I was being paid under award, doing duties above the supposed pay scale, and then ignoring all the times I pointed out that they were a disability job service, and should stop putting me in the exact job I was instructed to avoid.
Long story short, they are worse than just pen pushers. They make it harder to find a real job that will last more than a month.
Yes Ashlea
I know, my son visits one, because he only has part time work, he passed VCE
The only alternative learning centre was closed down about 1 year ago, not long after he finished school, now they have to travel over an hour through kangaroo country, if they have a car and licence, as Kennet closed the train service down
And there are a couple of buses, on the weekend they are less, and different times, weekend timetable
He dosnt meet the required hours, we live in a town of 2000
And the jobs are not here , unless you are related to shop, business owner
Or have the last right name, or a farmer, lot of rich farmers around
It was TAFE closed down that serviced a lot of people in town and surrounding hamlets
We couldn’t believe it, we fought it, but to no avail, our young ones will be a lost generation
It’s already in the making
I haven’t heard anyone say anything positive about job centres either. I’ve never had to use one myself. I recall that my mother had to use one at one stage. They insisted on typing up her resume for her (it was already typed up neatly) and she said it came back with several typos and other errors.
<
The Salvos have made a lot of money from job centres.
As well as Mrs Rudd.
I have had the pleasure a few years ago of having to, and I told her, “this is nothing but a talk fest”
Same, I had an up to date resume, but they did it again, I felt it was more like a counselling session
With untrained, psychiatrists, it was a joke and I told them, they admitted in end, “they are not there,
to find me a job” I said, “well why am I here”they couldn’t answer that
“Keeps the pen pushers in a job” as I told them it’s a joke the whole thing Lee
John 921
Yep salvos come up again, when it comes to the vulnerable and young
The centre I just left (and they can’t understand why) have left me about $1800 out of pocket with unpaid/underpaid wages. They say they will deal with it, and can’t understand why I’d be slightly p*ssed off at a “well, you’ll be paid it within 12 months”.
Ashlea
They are the leaches, and you just proved it, by writing that
But there run is over, a good thing never lasts forever,
So they will suck it for all it’s worth and people while they can
It’s almost like they don’t realise there aren’t enough jobs out there for every single person to be fully employed.
The capitalists know it but don’t care because they aren’t the ones struggling to survive. Capitalism relies on a high level of unemployment to work.
Let me rephrase. It’s almost like the middle ($100-200k bracket) class who bitch about welfare bludgers don’t realise there aren’t enough jobs and that we can’t all just get one if we weren’t so lazy.
Yes I suspect that many of them are not aware of that, Ashlea.
Ashlea
Take this as comfort
I contacted the AFP yesterday and centrelink, they were all ears
Dobbed in a tax fraud and dodger, and he was also helping a worker to rort
Centrelink, about time we dobbed in a tax bludger
Soooo I did, and he will go down, already been caught once before by the ATO
I am expecting a jail sentence for latest discrepancies of his and fraudulent business partners
Oh and he used same worker to take points for him
Or he would of lost his car licence, and last night, I said to myself
“Another one bites the dust” 😉
Love this. Spot on!
I *think*, from Mr Hockey’s numbers, that he’s saying the average taxpayer earns just under $150,000/year. That gives $12000/month, covering your own “$6000” and one non-taxpayer. It could be that I’m misinterpreting, and what he means is that the taxpayer earns $75,000 p.a., for $6000/month, i.e. one non-taxpayer. Thus you would work a different month for your own “welfare”.
The “average” is misleading; it’s thrown off by the relatively small number of people who earn disproportionately high wages. The median is probably a better measure – the halfway point when you rack up every person’s salary individually. This was about $57,400 a few years ago (http://mattcowgill.wordpress.com/2013/05/13/what-is-the-typical-australians-income-in-2013/).
Of course, our salary is not 100% taxes. It might be fairer to say that the average taxpayer works three months of the year to support one non-taxpayer with his/her own taxes. WIth another three months for your own “welfare”, that still leaves six months of tax for the government to play with…
Of course, it’s entirely possible that Eleventy Hockey doesn’t actually know what the blazes he actually means.
Whilst his numbers dont add up exactly, they aren’t necessarily far off. Just the bit about a cleaner is not exactly true, as cleaners pay naff all tax cause they earn naff all.
“This year the Australian government will spend on average over $6,000 on welfare for every man, woman and child in the country. Given that only around 45 per cent of the population pays income tax, the average taxpayer must pay more than twice this amount in tax to fund welfare expenditure.
The welfare bill I can find in a quick Google search is 119 BN. So 119BN divided by 22 million men, women and children is about $5500 per head, so not far off $6000. So since only 45% of the population pay tax, the average welfare bill for each tax payer is about $12000.
“In other words, the average working Australian, be they a cleaner, a plumber or a teacher, is working over one month full-time each year just to pay for the welfare of another Australian. Is this fair?”
The average salary of an Australian is $73,000 per year. So one months salary is about $6000. So using this average figure, yes, the average working Australian contributes about a months full pay (before tax…its worse after tax) to pay for another persons welfare (on an average basis). If you used the median Australian salary of $57k/year , its worse. Its about 1.3 months pay. So he selected the softer option of the two.
The only error in his statement is a cleaner would contribute this. An average teacher and certainly an average plumber make 73k or more.
Fairly soft assessment – could’ve framed it a lot worse. Could’ve targeted the millions who receive 100% of their income from welfare, or the millions that receive more welfare than they pay in tax.
My sons a plumber and you are dreaming Jay
What a load of crock
Regardless of the figures, it’s the paradigm to which I object.
Mr Hockey, Mr McFarlane, I want one thing made clear. My taxes are not insurance. They don’t pay for my hospital stay in future years (I hope that I will never need that much hospital time.) They do not form a fund for any unemployment payments and if I ever have the misfortune of becoming unemployed I do not expect to lose my entitlements as soon as all my tax to that date has been spent. I don’t begrudge paying my taxes to support those who are less fortunate, able or privileged than myself; that’s what makes this a society.
Hockey: “In other words, the average working Australian, be they a cleaner, a plumber or a teacher, is working over one month full-time each year just to pay for the welfare of another Australian. Is this fair?”
The short answer is “Yes”. That’s what taxes are for.
The only receipts in the government ĺedgers are personal income tax? Cogitate on this thought for ablut 2.5ms and then realise what a croc Joe & Co. are trying to sell you 🙄
Actually the 2014 welfare bill is $131.6 BN, up from $119 bn. There’s 22.6 million Aussies….so its about $5800 per head in welfare..so hockey was closer than I thought. Not sure though, why it was so confusing? Trying to come up with some of the numbers labor are throwing around, is however a futile mission!
Catholic Church, they are infiltrating Manus now
through the gov, educating the children, the children need protecting from the Catholic Church
And likes Of Tone’s and co, the catholic gov, not the fed gov
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/13/children-christmas-island-attend-catholic-education-centre
The average Australians wouldn’t need to work one month of every year to pay for the welfare of another Australian if the wealthy Australians paid their fair share of income tax.
“Not sure though, why it was so confusing?”
Because the average Australian is earning less than the average Australian wage.
So how many months do we have to work to pay for your wages, super & cigars Joe, not to mention the other parasites that sit in cabinet with you??
Yeah dont hear how much to often from eleventy
How many billions tax invaders, minimisers, frauds
Cost the country, nooooooo
He is one
Lee he says average. What else should he have used? The lower number he uses, the more months of equivalent pay required to produce $6000. It’s not saying that $6000 is the entire income,it’s the average every living person in oz gets in support. Of course some families receive 40k+ in benefits and pay zero tax. A lot receive no benefits and pay over $40k in tax. I think using the average is a little less class warfareish. Some think it’s fair, some think it isn’t. That will never change!
<
According to the ATO every Aussie man woman and child gave Murdoch a $40 xmas present.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/tax-office-forced-to-pay-rupert-murdoch-880m-20140217-32weo.html
John
how much did Gina get for Xmas
and all the other leaners in this country
ohhh billions thats right
leaners and bludgers are the Ginas and rancid Ruperts of this country
“Lee he says average. What else should he have used? ”
How about not making the statement at all? He knows that people will automatically assume this money is going to people who don’t want to work. Yet a large amount of welfare is also given to people who pay tax, e.g. family allowances. Welfare expenditure also pays for child protection, child care, services and concessions for seniors, carer allowances and war veterans. Or is he now demonising children who need protection through no fault of their own, seniors who have worked and paid taxes for decades, people who served their country in war and those who care for the sick at a lower cost than putting them into a nursing home?
http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=60129544564
This report (which I assume is where you found the $119 billion as it was the estimated expenditure on welfare in 2010-11) states that the average amount spent by governments on welfare services for Australian residents in 2010-11 was $1308 per person. Where did the $6000 figure come from? A breakdown of payments on page 391 shows that expenditure on unemployment benefits was only a small portion of the $119 billion. It’s hard to tell the exact amount from the chart but it looks like less than $10 billion.
Are there no depths where that scum sucking, lying piece of shit won’t sink?
Lee I love your work 🙂
PEFO and MYEFO
That’s all that matters
And eleventy wacked another 68 bill
And took a rabbit out of a hat
Or is that a tax out of a hat
Is it a rabbit or a tax
Is it a cat in a hat
Eleventy and the rest are mathematically illiterate
PEFO go read it Jay, no budget emergency, no 1 bill interest a month
No need to be arseholes, but to this gov it comes naturally 😉
Dog give me strength
PEFO and MYEFO end of story
You have no argument Jay Jay
Labor, you sound like an old broken record
When all else fails
Resort to Labor, and the blame game, sooooo predictable
It’s not working anymore, and you know it Jay Jay
Is it a tax or a rabbit, they have no idea, to busy smoking cigars and dancing 😉
No you won’t catch me, you are an idiot, and Grub or is that c..nt 😉
Yeah yeah you can’t even type PEFO
You are so far up your own arse, you have not go idea what day it is
Denial is a fools game lol lol lol lol
Now go crawl back in your cave Jay Jay
Jay:
Wow! Do you even bother to read what you type? Or is it just one unchecked brainfart?
And Jay, his/her economic misapprehensions rebutted and corrected by the revelation that he/she is imbecilic, a juvenile coleopterid, and possibly the genitalia of a female mammal, returns to the mainstream with his/her political paradigm fundamentally altered by the irrefutable, clinical logic of the refutation, to argue vehemently and logically for a more progressive government amongst his/her friends and acquaintances.
Way to represent the cause.
PS That may have been sarcasm.
Come on folks, Jay has been very polite and has provided data to support his view. None of you have found alternative data to refute his view.
I’ve been a leftie all my life and raised by leftie parents. I won’t vote Labor either at the present time. A few weeks ago I responded to one of their emails about the budget and told them I was disappointed at the lack of leadership and their drift to the right. They replied with a list of what they plan to oppose in the budget. When I asked what they plan to do about closing loopholes for the wealthy and large corporations who avoid paying their fair share of tax, they were silent.
Labor at the present time are nothing more than the lesser of two evils. We deserve better.
Thank you, Lee.
I personally wish for Labor to voluntarily address the universal problem of corruption through supporting a federal ICAC, which would be of national benefit, legislatively and economically, regardless of who holds power.
Their reluctance invites suspicion.
Thanks for the explanation Jay. I’m still displeased at Hockey’s comments. This money is providing a range of important services for many people. It is a normal state for a contributive society and these are services that most of us want to keep. Hockey’s comments are once again demonstrating what a nasty, selfish man he is. He has forgotten his background very quickly. Life would have been very different for him had he been raised in his father’s war torn country.
Jay may have been polite but he has does not know the facts. For your erudition Jay,
In the budget it quotes the total CGS on issue (gross debt) in May as $319 billion. It predicts net government debt for 2013-14 of $191.5bn.
PEFO shows a cumulative deficit of $54.6 billion over the forward estimates under Labor policies with a surplus in 2016-17.
Coalition policies in the budget are predicting a cumulative deficit over the same period of $107.4 billion with no surplus predicted over the forward estimates. This is a deterioration of $53 billion in 9 months – that’s almost $6 billion a month.
I’d like to see a federal ICAC too, although someone will shut it down when they can’t stand the heat any longer.
“I’m not going back to read it now…but I believe the 700 bn debt or whatever it was, was presented in the MYEFO? Ok take out the $8 billion bank gift, take out the $20 billion or whatever it was spent on jets, its still a ridiculous debt!”
As I have shown, your idea about the debt is completely wrong. You are also wrong in this statement. MYEFO also took out the revenue from the carbon tax, the mining tax, the FBT tax on novated leases, the superannuation tax on those earning over $100,000 pa. That adds up to another about $15 billion in lost revenue.
Joe also changed assumptions about growth and unemployment. Everyone knows he purposely chose worst case scenario figures to make forward projections look bad.
You must also remember another $22.2 billion on paid parental leave, and about $3 billion in bribes to polluters for his silly Direct Inaction Plan. They also intend to cut company tax.
Joe left in the promised spending on Foreign Aid even though he said they were cutting it, just to make the future debt look as big as he could.
PEFO showed, under Labor, net debt was projected to return to zero in 2023-24.
In other words WE HAVE NO CRISIS AND JOE IS LYING.
<
@Lee
"Labor at the present time are nothing more than the lesser of two evils. We deserve better."
Completely agree.
Hockey is on the ropes ( or even down for the count) and still Labor does nothing.
Maybe its because Hockey is "such a nice bloke".
Nope ! …. sarcasm is very difficult in print.
Probably, Lee.
However, the media feasting on what perfidies did come to light might shake a few voters out of their post-cynical apathy, and prompt examination of the behavior of their own party beyond unconsidered team barracking.
Naive, maybe, but in the current deteriorating climate I’ll cling to any flotsam I can find.
Tony’s paid parental leave scheme is going to cost every man woman and child almost $250 a year. ($5.5 billion divided by 22.6 million Aussies)
It’s hard to get rid of voter apathy. So many people say it doesn’t matter which one you vote for, they both break their promises, they both lie, they both support the wealthy dodging tax. And it’s true.
Bernardi is calling for more honesty and integrity in politics. We badly need it. I don’t trust him as far as I can throw him, but we are agreed on this point.
Kaye just heard a piece on ABC News Breakfast on economics and the Australian dollar is becoming stronger with many economists predicting possible parity.
As you have rightly raised the point of Hockey $8.8 billion gamble with Australian taxpayers money before, I wonder what your thoughts on this news are?
Probably one of the reasons Hockey is becoming so agitated about his unnecessarily draconian budget not getting an open reception is he now faces the real prospect of having billions go down the gurgler purely because of a gamble he took as he thought down the track it would make him an economic hero.
Hockey is looking to every blame shift he can for his economic mismanagement.
Also this leads to a historic trend with Liberal governments in gambling with billions in public money. Costello did it and lost large sums but only got away with it because of the huge amounts of revenue that was pouring in. Fraser also did it, or was it his Treasurer Howard, and those gambles also cost us billions and put us into a deeper recession than necessary. They didn’t get away with it.
No argument from me Kaye, regarding the imaginary “budget crisis”. However if Labor plugged the holes for the wealthy, and stopped the likes of Apple and Google from funnelling vast sums of money out of Australia to avoid paying tax, we wouldn’t need to be in debt.
Agreed Mobius, I saw that news item too. Hockey must be shitting bricks right now. I hope they have extremely rough edges.
Lee, yes, electoral outcomes matter little if the institutions of corruption are still entrenched.
As for “Saint Bernadi”, correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe he voted with his party in denying Senator Milne’s members bill calling for a federal investigation and standing body.
Pollies can flap their jowls making sympathetic sounds, but for any credibility they need to walk the walk as well.
I’d personally like to see some of them made to walk the plank, if not given a good keel-haulin’. Arrrhh!
Nice chatting, work calls.
A fully independent Public Service Board needs to be reinstated for all government appointments particularly for bodies such as the Ombudsman, Corruption Commissions, Auditor-General, Police Integrity Commission, the Electoral Commission, and Remuneration Tribunal.
Appointments must be based only on proven competence and integrity. The main reason many of these bodies at present fall short of public expectations is that the executives are appointed by, and their briefs are constrained by, government. Yet their role will often involve investigation of government.
In other words all those bodies that have no political functions but are there to ensure the integrity of the system should be independent of government. One feature of our original federal constitution that should be reinstated is a role for a directly-elected Governor-General to fully umpire the system in addition to the traditional role as head-of-state. He or she could also head a fourth arm of government known as the Integrity Branch. Such a role for the Governor-General would be spelt out in the Constitution as having no power in relation to political policy but only to ensure integrity of government and to ensure the Constitution is upheld. The concept of a separate fourth branch of government has been canvassed in legal circles in recent years, particularly by James Spigelman in 2004, then Chief Justice of the New South Wales Supreme
Court. It has been extensively examined in the October 2012 issue of the Australian Institute of Administrative Law Forum Magazine No 70. As James Spigelman pointed out in his two lectures, the concept of a separate integrity level of government is an ancient Chinese concept. In the last three decades we have informally created this fourth branch as a means of stemming
various problems but with only limited success. Formalising its independence from government would certainly improve its performance.
http://parkesfoundation.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/hporation2013.pdf
This speech by ted Mack is 12 pages long but worth every second spent reading it in my mind. He has some very good ideas about why the two party system has led to corruption and how to improve our government.
Perhaps we could be given a choice as to how our taxes are spent.
I choose education, health, welfare, real infrastructure building, immediate action on climate change, in fact anything that helps more of us than less.
Then our choices are to be loaded onto a website for all to see what and who our preferences are. Wonder how many will choose fighter jets over fire brigades?
Unfortunately with a compliant MSM, the message of the damage this budget is doing is unlikely to get to the most disengaged voters until it hits someone close to them.
‘Is it FAIR’ Joe Hockey asks…
Apparently us people, teachers, plumbers and the like pay $6000 (of something?) to support these bludgers that have paid tax all their working life and now on the aged pension, to support those low-life’s that don’t have a job because their factories have closed or due to ‘down-sizing’ to maximise profit margins their job in (let’s say the post office, government sector, car- manufacturing plant) no longer exists and they expect a safety net so they can still feed the family and not be thrown out of their home… Those disabled who pretend they are bedridden, or in a wheelchair, or mentally impaired unable to hold down a job, even if one actually was available and they beat everyone else (yes 100’s of other job seekers for that job including homeless, hungry youth that weren’t able to get a job or afford uni fees/books/accommodation and have no safety net but can beg on the streets, or resort to crime but definitely CAN’T get any of our $6000) expecting a free ride on our $6000….
Is it Fair Joe????
No, not at all, because most of us are happy to support others who are at some point in their lives need welfare, because not all are gifted free scholarships for education and guaranteed jobs, not all people who honestly paid their taxes had slush funds they could feed into their superannuation, no Joe not fair at all while you are taking our $6000 of teachers and the like you are handing paid parental leave, $50,000 a pop for any $100,000 earner or more, straight to them, while pretending there is a budget crisis, $50,000 for each and every one they have (remember when people had babies because they wanted a family not because they could get $50000) a ‘bonus’ more than many men and women earn in a year, you are giving that, while destroying the rest of the welfare system st up to protect the vunerable(?) No it’s not fair Joe, No… Joe you are so right, not fair.
Why don’t we all pay 1 months work effort to support what we have, hell the welfare system would benefit, you see you say we common folk, the ones that should be outraged at helping people that need welfare to live in dignity, paying around 1 months of out labour, teachers and the like, the ones not earning over the $100,000 and there for popping out the next upper class won’t result in a windfall, say we are happy doing this as part of the greater good, say we think people shouldn’t be measured in dollar value (should they Joe?) no that’s right, they shouldn’t otherwise you would say people like Mother Teresa is worthless and Rupert Murdoch is a supreme entity, so Joe, to be fair, let’s all do 1 months work, because assuming all people are equal no matter what their pay is prior to tax lurks and perks, we can all work to support that system for a month…
You see Joe, I worked out that month of work ($6,000) is not what Australians should be angry about, because you are asking ‘Gina’ magnates and the like for a lot less, as a matter of fact It takes about 9 seconds of Gina’s wages to make that same amount, good for her she was handed her fortunate financial future on a plate, but you see it’s not fair as you point out Joe, that teachers and the like have to lift the heaviest load, the load of Gina and the likes, because they too need to give freely a month of their salary, you their time is no more valuable than another’s, otherwise it makes for a very unfair outcome, with us teachers, plumbers and the like making the biggest sacrifices, lifting the heaviest weights while others give a minuscule 9 seconds of their work time, no it’s not fair Joe, you are correct.
Lee…. please have a look at the wording of Jay’s comment I included in the quote… It starts with a call for “less emotional discussion” and then immediately jumps into an emotional appraisal of the previous government.
That’s sorta funny, right?
Carers NT posted on their website on October 16 last year that the NDIS rollout was being dumped. The 2013 election was held just over a month before that where the Liberal Party and their leader had pledged they would indeed fund the NDIS. The NDIS was a wedge issue, so too were many other promises the Libs were forced into as the polls tightened, before the polls tightened Abbott stood up in front of two crowds telling them he will hurt them, that they had to endure pain (financial), as the race became closer they dropped that rhetoric and dealt with the wedge issues, not touching welfare of publicly funded broadcasters and giving many concessions implying Abbott was Rudd lite, except as we all know that race to see who could put refugees in the most danger. Every wedge issue promise has been broken. EVERY wedge issue promise has been broken. Whilst the budget was the first real chance to know what was going to be broken they Broke every promise they could that did not need to pass the senate, and some that actually did need the senates approval. I am one of those people who knows the current government lied and cheated to obtain government simply because they broke the wedge issue promises I knew they would always break. I made a prediction and saw it realised, almost the scientific method, but we have other proof. I have asked for Carers NT to respond to some questions I have put to them relating to their 16th October, 2013 posting that the NDIS roll out was being dumped. Pyne at the time was walking away from Gonski, the NBN co contractors had packed up in my area without finishing their job and left for good, They have never returned. The question is how soon after the election were they informing others that wedge issue promises would be broken. The Narrative we are getting is that they would be essentially negligent to deliver these promises. Had they said before the election that the NBN would pack up and leave most areas, areas that should have been connected by now would they have won? Had they said they will attack welfare, will go after SBS and the ABC would they have won? Had they told us they would support a war criminal regime to stop the flow of refugees would they have won? Had they told us they would make drastic changes to medicare would they have won? The NDIS is not going to happen, before carers NT were told government would have known for how long? At a time when the Libs were on a spending spree putting 8 billion into the reserve bank, borrowing much more than Labor and spending three times more than Labor did yet they were clearly not intending to follow through with their promises. We have a right to try to find the earliest indication possible that the Libs were not going to deliver the wedge issue promises. In my opinion this is why Australia had the likes of march in march because many in Australia already knew we were the victims of a con job. To this day they ultimately deny any broken promises, really it isnt about broken promises, it is about a fraudulent campaign to gain power, they pulled the real Abbott out of their pocket within days of the election win. Abbotts own words before the election demand we now have another election, so where is it? is that also in someones pocket. I have asked Carers NT if they contacted any media outlets regarding their announcement. It is time to find out just how soon after the election they decided nothing would go ahead.
Kaye Lee, bloody oath, no more croney commissions, manned by extremist ideologues who are gifted positions, specially created at taxpayer expense, engineered to deliver predetermined conclusions to suit a radical agenda.
Wilson, Warburton, Donelly, etc, all appointed without an open selection process, without pretense of the representation of contra, or even moderate viewpoints, almost as if an arrogant assumption had been made that a reactionary neo-con viewpoint was the only valid opinion.
corvus boreus:
Golldarnit!!! You STILL don’t get it, do you? The LNP govt had a mandate to do as it bloody pleased! The adults were back in charge!
I prefer grown-ups, adult sounds elitist.
A tale is told of the Roman emperor Gaius “caligula”, how he once conducted an auction in the senate as an elder senator dozed.
Each time the senator nodded, it was taken as a raising bid, and the unfortunate awoke to find he had committed his entire estate, and then some, to a worthless object he did not desire.
I see a parallel.
Silly sleepy senator straya.
This guy who writes for The Vine is really very astute whilst being entertaining. I think he’s a must addition to anyone’s favourite list:
http://www.thevine.com.au/life/news/10-things-tone-and-rupey-bffs-4-eva-20140612-282614/
Ta, Dan
if he dat good all time I impressed.
http://thekouk.com/blog/some-home-truths-on-abc-fact-checking.html#.U51CImZ_XMI
This explains in detail why the $667 billion figure is wrong…
Jay,
Let me help you out. The charter of budget honesty was introduced to stop the lies that Hockey and Abbott are spreading. PEFO is prepared by the secretaries of Finance and Treasury with NO input from political parties so is the only document that you can trust as an honest appraisal.
The figure of $667 billion in debt is a projection for a possible debt in ten years time from MYEFO – Hockey’s document. This included Coalition decisions to forego revenue from the carbon and mining taxes and from the changes to the FBT on novated leases and tax on super earnings over $100,000 pa. It also included the Coalition spending decisions of giving $8.8 billion to the RBA and the $300 million a year in interest that that borrowing costs us, and billions in bribes to polluters. Another trick was to leave in Labor spending of $7.6 billion on Foreign Aid even though they had already said they would cut that. Leave it in MYEFO, cut it from budget, and claim to have improved the bottom line.
But the biggest con was Hockey deliberately changing all the forecasts for employment and growth. At the time, everyone recognised he did this on purpose – that change alone made the forecast over $50 billion worse. For example, Hockey predicted growth figures of 2.75% this year with a drop to 2.5% next year. Latest figures indicate growth of 3.5% this year and better than expected employment figures. Hockey is now trying to claim this improvement in figures as due to his actions. CRAP. He is fiddling the numbers in the most obvious way possible.
And for your information, I have read all the documents and am not blindly accepting what Penny Wong or Stephen Koukoulas say. My information comes from the source documents.
Jay you know that Costello at his supposed height couldn’t tell what the balance sheet would look like in a days time. He got it spectacularly wrong just about every time, just as this government will. So I’m looking forward to you criticising them every time they get it wrong. Of course you won’t, you will just repeat their excuses.
And attacking the messenger with little of substance to back it up.
Now the Libs are in power and from the get go they have proved to be more unreliable, you know such as the string of Fraudband lies and breaking of major pledges.
By the way where is Fraudband up to at the moment? We know it is going to cost more than NBN both to roll out and for the end user. For the end user way more. And we know it’s way behind schedule, indeed its schedule was changed the moment Turnbull got into office.
Any way you look at it this is a very bad government. That its supporter keep needing to attack past Labor to defend it instead of being able to lucidly espouse what’s good about this government is proof of that.
Interesting Jay that the basis for the forecasts used by treasury in PEFO are turning out to be closer to the mark than Hockey’s MYEFO assumptions.
Also interesting that it’s only mindless right-whingers who seem to think Mr Koukoulas’ reputation is in tatters. His peers hold him in very high regard…
Bacchus,
Hockey’s MYEFO says “Dwelling investment has also been weaker than expected at the 2013 PEFO”
whereas the Australian Construction Industry Forum says
May 2014
The May 2014 update to the ACIF Forecasts projects total Residential Building expenditure to grow at an average annual growth rate of 2.3% between 2013-14 and 2022-23. The upturn in expenditure reflects the anticipated interest rate forecast, with relatively strong growth in the short term, before moderating by around 2016-17 to 2019-20 given the projected ramp up in interest rates.
The MYEFO revised down nominal GDP growth for 2013-14 from 3.75% to 3.5% and for 2014-15 from 4.5% to 3.5%. That remains historically low especially given it forecasts real GDP to grow by 2.5% in 2014-15.
This revision of nominal GDP caused a write down from the pre-election fiscal and economic outlook (PEFO) of $36.8bn in tax receipts estimates and a subsequent increase in expenses (through unemployment benefits and the like) of $17.8bn. This by itself increased the cumulative level of deficits over the next four years by $54bn out of the overall increase of $68bn in cumulative deficits predicted in the MYEFO.
If there is one measure that will be more likely to improve the budget bottom line than any other, it will be if this estimate for nominal GDP growth turns out to be overly pessimistic.
◾In trend terms, GDP increased 0.8% in the March quarter 2014.
◾In seasonally adjusted terms, GDP increased by 1.1% in the March quarter
Seems like Joe may have got his numbers wrong….who’da thunk it
Everybody please read the Parkes Lecture Link from Kaye Lee regarding Government in Ozland..
The only way to right the ship of State which has been and still is being traduced repeatedly by both major parties for their own venal purposes leaving the concept of Participatory Palimentary Democracy in the starting booth as the field race to the finish line.
How did our forefathers get it so wrong so as to give politicians free reign over their workplace? By design so that the landed gentry remained in power no matter what the populace wishes.
Everybody read the Parkes Lecture Link provided by Kaye Lee so that a way forward can be activated and hopefully defeat the blight of Political 2 Party Power ruling the Parliament with the help of a cadre of suckhole politicians to enforce the powerlessness of the Australian public.
It’s in every bodies best interest to at least get educated about the major impediment to Participatory Parlimentary Democracy in Australia today and how the Parliments of Australia through an ill considered Constitution continue to defy the wishes of Australians and how the Political Elite laugh in the face of real time attempts by concerned Australians to right the ship of State.
I see the one dimensional ever lying Jerk known as PM is as ever remaining true to his code of Verballing others so as to dismiss any opposition to his grand mucked up plans for Australia.
Export Abbott not Refugees
Absolutely, Trevor
Post by Kaye Lee ,
14 june, 9;12 am
Much clarity and insight to be gained from both the post and link.
Ted Mack is a man of wisdom, foresight, and most of all, integrity. I would love a movement started by Ted Mack, Tony Windsor, Scott Ludlum, Bernie Fraser…
..possibly Geoffrey Robertson QC.
I, too, dream of governance through a consensus coalition of intelligent, educated, experienced, ethical and humble people, making choices to honestly represent the best interests of their electorates, wider society, the environment around us, and the prospects for the future.
Not currently happening.
I saw Josh Frydenburg and Ed Husic on Q&A: they come from opposite sides of the political fence and the religious divide : Josh is Jewish and Ed is Muslim.
Two impressive and intelligent guys and, seemingly good friends. This new generation of political leaders in the making augers well for Australia and certainly shows up the current leaders and in particular the shallow leadership of the Liberal Party.
Anybody agree ?
I think Scott Ludlum is excellent.
Frydenburg seems to know his stuff which is a pleasant change but it was disappointing when he did the party line thing about “that’s $25,000 for every…”
Husic was less impressive – more interested in being amiable and funny, though it was a pleasant change to see two people who MAY be able to work together
For me that’s a nightmare. But then again I don’t view ‘society’ through a ‘functionalist’ perspective. Rather I analyse ‘society’ from a ‘conflict’ perspective.
Society and the way it operates is fundamentally a ‘contest’ between groups or classes. Sure they often have things in common and can cooperate to achieve mutually beneficially outcomes but when the rubber meets the road one class will invariably exploit or at least attempt to exploit the other.
I don’t view society in classes. I see individuals. I see good and bad rich people and good and bad poor people. I see selfish people and I see empathetic generous people. I see people who work hard and people who contribute nothing to society (the latter often being quite wealthy middlemen who profit from the skills and hard work of others). We NEED common goals. We need to ask what sort of society we want our children to live in rather than which suburb they will live in.
Well Kaye, you seem to operate from a ‘functionalist’ perspective. The notion that society is held together by social consensus, or cohesion, in which members of the society agree upon, and work together to achieve, what is best for society as a whole.
Sweet. But not helpful in understanding the way the world actually operates rather then the way you want it to operate.
If one wants to look at ‘capitalist’ society and see the tensions, then the United States provides a good example. When the going gets tough, as it is at the moment in the US, then the opposed interests become more apparent.
Further:
More here. http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2014/6/17/us-economy/gridlock-nation-us-politics-takes-hardline-turn
I am only too aware of how the ‘world’ operates…I am also aware of the difference that individuals make. We are not ALL looking to exploit someone or something.
Agree! But let’s not make the ‘exception’, the ‘rule’.
Also agree. But that ‘change’ only comes after a struggle against those whose interests are at risk.
I know what you mean but I do believe that each person must set their own standards in life. I cannot be responsible for what others do but I can take responsibility for what I choose to do, which sometimes involves standing up against injustice, but it also involves taking a cake into the next door neighbour, or paying for a young kid’s soccer registration and finding him some second hand boots. It can be mowing the lawn for your great aunt. It might not help in running the country but it helps in making it a better place to be.
When the shitstem is set up in such a manner as to exclude your voice, then what you have is entrenched inequality as is the case with the present Australian Parlimentary Democracy.
No matter the arguement you make, no matter the logic employed, no matter the rightness of wrongness of your point of view or your viewing point or your position, when the shitstem has entrenched inequality as its basis then your voice is negated and you become voiceless and unrepresented unless you subscribe to the overarching mendacity of, in Australia the 2 party system of Parlimentary representation.
The speeches by Ted Mack in the Parkes Lecture 2013 details how, why, when, where, and by whom you have been as an Australian voter left holding the cats tail.
Ted Mack’s is not the only voice in the electoral wilderness attempting to provide an educated forum for any who care to move beyond their opposition to, or opposing position, or opposing view point, or opposition point of view to the quaint 2 party political shitstem in contemporary Australia which just happens to entrench the constitutional inequaties that make up the Parliments of Australia.
All of us can argue between our selves till the cows come home and see us blue in the face about which side of the 2 party shitstem we agree with and whether Husic or Fryburg are mates and therefore this bodes well for us Australians as these bloke will “do” the right thing.
It does not matter one whit as to whether these Polititians are mates from opposing sides as they will never do anything other than the bidding of their chosen team of Party Political Hypocrisy..
That is simply the rules that they play under.
What is required is a complete overhaul of the operation of Parliments in Australia because putting it simply the present mob of venal cocksuckers masquerading as political representatives in the major 2 Parties only do the bidding of their party first and then if it interests them enough your bidding
Along with the above todays political classes continue to uphold a hereditory tradition of “winner takes all” and keep control of all aspects of Parliments operation accvording to which Party of the 2 happens to defraud enough of the voting public so as to gain control of the Treasury.
Export Abbott not refugees
Matters Not ,
There is a time, when goals are mutualistic, that adversarial competitiveness becomes counterproductive. It wastes resources,distracts focus, causes collatoral damage, drains collective morale and, at the deepest level of conflict, causes internal divisions that lose wars.
I understand bsaiccompetition theory, from the most basic level of life subsisting upon the end of other life, and am in not naive with regard to socio-political power-games.
But we are neurologically and physically plastic in our forms and behaviors, capable of forming new habits through conscious practice; in short we can be better.
As for rational agreement between sensible people as the basis of governance being a nightmare to you, then the current political situation;
of a duopoly, factionally divided and shredding each other whist neutering any potential rivals, regardless of merit,
quashing any reform towards honesty or accountability in order to protect their own interests,
fostering internal divisions through controversial and intrusive social legislation,
and basing their decisions upon the principles of punishing dissenters, rewarding cronies, and amassing personal power and wealth ,
well, it must be a sweet dream unfolding.
Sadly, I cannot type “basic competition” legibly.
corvus boreus, before I respond in detail, let me make a few points at the outset. Firstly, and at a high level of generality, while I have control of what I write, I have no control over the ‘meaning(s)’ a reader will give.
Secondly, when it comes to responding to ‘posts’ on a Blog, one can’t (or perhaps, should not) engage in deep levels of ‘specificity’. As I understand the ‘common sense’ of ‘blogging’, while difficult to define in terms of ‘necessary and sufficient’ conditions, it’s certainly not about being ‘academic’ and all that implies.
Given those limitations, perhaps I should explain in greater detail what I was ‘on about’.
You said:
Can only agree, as I said above. When the boat springs a leak, it’s in all our interests to ‘bail’. Applies to much of daily life, I suspect. No argument here.
Here, I begin to have some problems. Let me start with ‘sensible’ people. I assume that ‘sensible’ equates with those who have and display ‘common sense’? Nevertheless, it’s pretty well accepted, at least in the sociological literature, that ‘common sense’ when scrutinised is in many, if not most instances, not so ‘common’ as most believe and certainly not ‘sensible’ at all. For example, Tony Shepherd’s ‘common sense’ re the ‘Role of Government’ is not mine, and at so many levels.
As to my ‘nightmare’ can I draw your attention to the ‘rational agreement’ reached by Hawke and Keating all those years ago re the adoption of neo-liberalism, applauded by the ‘conservative’ forces.
Neo-liberalism became the ‘common sense’ of that time. It was applauded by ‘sensible’ people but the result:
A nightmare? Generated by ‘sensible people’? I think so.
MattersNot,
I don’t subscribe to “common sense” as a principle, and my use of “sensible people” was a condensing of the list of differing personal qualities I had cited at 6:26.
The lack of balance in our representatives, particularly the over-representation of economics and law, often with limited scope of experience, can lead to the entrenched mindset that consecutively leads to ideologies like neo-liberal economic rationalism.
I think we have now entered into an era of domestic politics that will make the nightmares of the past seem blissfully nostalgic.
“The lack of balance in our representatives, particularly the over-representation of economics and law, often with limited scope of experience, can lead to the entrenched mindset that consecutively leads to ideologies like neo-liberal economic rationalism.”
They’re probably not the best apples on the tree either. A half decent lawyer would be taking a pay cut to become a politician. The ones we have on the Liberal front bench are probably quite non-dynamic in the real world.
Hence the “limited scope of experience”, Lee.
Would you hire a coked-up clown like Christopher Pyne to front your case in court?
Corvus, you really should not insult a coked-up clown. And no, I’d represent myself rather than have any of them represent me.
Will someone please tell me how much PPL will cost per year? Somewhere between $4b and $7b. has someone an authoritative figure please? jamesdarby@y7mail.com