So while you may be just as critical of Abbotts' fear mongering when he was in opposition, the majority on this forum only seem to see things as negative when it's Labor that's doing them.
Perhaps consider that 'the majority on this forum' simply disagreed with the carbon tax and naturally enough would not wish to negate anything said against it.
And, if you have a grievance against what 'the majority on this forum' might or might not have said, maybe consider that you should address that grievance to that majority.
I'd love Labor to offer some smart alternative savings - they have all the Henry Tax review savings still to implement - but they're sadly playing from the small target rule book and are setting themselves up for the same revenue shortfalls that Abbott has gotten himself into.
The magic pudding of an ever expanding ToT and private debt has come to an end. Neither side of politics seems to have realised that as yet.
On the contrary, all impressions suggest that the government has indeed realised the party is over and they are attempting to address the situation. Labor, on the other hand, seem to either actually still be in denial, or have also realised the oncoming mess, but have elected to maximise their political advantage by playing to the naivete and vulnerability of the electorate.
Tasmania with the highest unemployment on the country cannot get workers to pick fruit so they have to rely on overseas workers to do the jobs. This is just an example of one industry.
Possibly the fact it's nearly impossible to earn a liveable income from picking fruit, and the fact that it is back breaking labour so anyone thinking to take it up would need at least a month to ease into it - slower picking means less $$$ is why it's hard to get people willing to do the work.
I acknowledge that this is anecdotal evidence only, but every afternoon I walk through a large caravan park populated by itinerant baby boomers. Talking with them, 90% of them move around the country following seasonal fruit picking. They tell me, yes, it's quite hard work, but the money is good for those who are prepared to put in the effort.
Why can't the young unemployed, who presumably are a bit more physically fit than people in their late middle age, do the same?
Who will help to pay the moving costs of the unemployed to move to a new area, especially in the Abbott era of no income support for 6 months?
I can't be bothered looking up the details for you, but there was an announcement quite recently that the government would provide removal expenses plus incentive payments for people prepared to move to where they could find work.
Should Abbott provide a 10K incentive for the unemployed over 50s to move to Tasmania to pick fruit? If they're of fit body they shouldn't they be required to work any job like it's expected of the young?
Answered. See above.
What you said syd.
I think we need to ask whether the problem is the electorate rather than the politicians.
Why did a moderate, commonsense party like the Australian Democrats eventually fail ?
Not enough media attention ? Letting through the GST ? (Howard's majority fell sharply after the GST went through because he had a big majority). Infighting (Lees vs Stott-Despoia) ? Defection of Kernot ?
They had good policies, but not strong leadership. Maybe the electorate still plays the man and not the ball.
+1. A great shame that the infighting within the Democrats caused their demise.
The rot seemed to start with Cheryl Kernot defecting to Labor, presumably connected with her relationship with a prominent Labor figure. As a result, their status of the maintainers of integrity was compromised, it seemed.