Australian Federal Election 2010

[lionking]

Yeah, yeah, we have got your message. All politicians suck. Why participate in this thread then?

 

[Hallo Alfie]

You're right. China making a 40% reduction in their emission intensity is more of a commitment than Australia's 5% cut on 2000 emissions, in overall terms. But all of a sudden per capita emissions matter, right?

Have you got some evidence we can see on their ETS?

Alfie, how many times do you need to have your arse handed to you in this thread? You confidently predicted the demise of Gillard months ago. Sylvia Browne-like that one.

My prediction was wrong, I've admitted it. Two flies on the wall mate. You are making a lot out of a pub bet. Is this the best you've got to debate me on? Really? Sad.

I also predicted the top eight in the footy six weeks out. I also predicted Tendulka was finished in test cricket, I have predicted many things, many wrong, some right.

As I understand it the increase in electricity prices for example is apparently $3.30 a week. Are you saying that when the tax is removed that the price of electricity will drop by the same amount?

I reckon we could predict that with the same degree of confidence that Gillard has predicted the cost and compensation difference, don't you?

Firstly, I've outlined how I've come to the conclusion that I came to, so compared to you my "idl[e] speculat[ions]" are already far superior to the drivel that you so generously call "challeng[ing] the specifics of others' claims". In fact considering both your actions in this thread and my actions this entire paragraph is just laughable.

LOL
So I was right, my asking direct questions as to "how" on out and out claims by the government is "JAQing off". Whereas you idly speculating isn't.

You say "compensation" I say "tax cut". Will you at least admit that under the Liberal's policy of repealing the carbon tax they will also be taking money away from ordinary Australians?

That's on one part of the equation: They will only be taking it away after they have given it to them by virtue of reduced expenses. Status quo will remain. The same way Gillard is retaining the status quo via compensation after the imposition of additional costs.

Gillard is costing and compensating. The coalition will be removing the cost and the compensation goes too.
All squaresy.

 

[bit_pattern]

Some people can be such wankers at times.

 

[Wildy]

I reckon we could predict that with the same degree of confidence that Gillard has predicted the cost and compensation difference, don't you?

So in other words you have no clue. Why don't you actually answer the question instead of being evasive?

So I was right, my asking direct questions as to "how" on out and out claims by the government is "JAQing off".

When I say you're JAQing off it's because all you're asking is "how" and using questions to dance around making actual claims that you have to defend. But I assume you're writing this because there's someone in Australia who doesn't see you as the genius you apparently see yourself as.

Whereas you idly speculating isn't.

JAQing off has a specific meaning so no, my speculating, by definition, isn't.

That's on one part of the equation: They will only be taking it away after they have given it to them by virtue of reduced expenses. Status quo will remain. The same way Gillard is retaining the status quo via compensation after the imposition of additional costs.

Gillard is costing and compensating. The coalition will be removing the cost and the compensation goes too.
All squaresy.

And all this relies on the assumption that businesses will drop their prices back to what they were before the carbon tax was implemented, an assumption that may not be true.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

So in other words you have no clue. Why don't you actually answer the question instead of being evasive?

Goose and gander comes to mind on your question. But you are right, how would I know? Have you got something ahowing that the prices won't return?

When I say you're JAQing off it's because all you're asking is "how" and using questions to dance around making actual claims that you have to defend.

Untrue. You accused me of JAQing off when I asked questions about direct claims others have made (eg Gillard).

And all this relies on the assumption that businesses will drop their prices back to what they were before the carbon tax was implemented, an assumption that may not be true.

I agree, the assumption may not be true. But there are options readily available, some that are already in plac and others that can be legislated if necessary. You are speculating that cost reductions won't return after the tax is repealed. At this stage its no big deal; it's not a hard fix - if it needs fixing at all.

 

[wombatwal]

From todays UnAustralian.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...n-daily-expenses/story-fn59niix-1226206614183
The dirt is flying now about Slipper.
This is only showing up Abbott and the Noalition.
Where was this dirt last week??
In a locked cupboard in Noalition HQ I assume.
ABA, ABA

 

[Hallo Alfie]

Some people can be such wankers at times.

Such a compelling and well thought out retort. It is hard to argue with such logic and reason.

Kudos to you; well played sir, well played.

 

[LashL]

This thread is being closed as it appears to have run its course on the subject of the 2010 federal election. Some recent posts about the Australian speaker resigning have been moved to a new, split thread here. Of course, anyone interested in discussing other topics in Australian politics is free to open new threads on those subjects in this sub-forum in the usual fashion.

Posted By: LashL