Australia's Economy - Nothing but the facts

It`s your concept, you brought it up. The least you could do, is to back up your comment with some specifics.

 

Well, we can all buy toilet paper with pretty pictures and patterns on it now! Now start to work your way up Aussie, it's not that hard!

 

It doesn't need specifics.

That's like if I said, "Australians earn more money," and you demanded to know which denominations their bank notes were in as proof.

 

You're an absolute nutter! No, I didn't know it was scrapped before it was published, so what! Do you feel this gives you a higher level of credibility because of this menial little fact.....polleaasse.....delusion at its best!....lol! In fact Slippery was providing the story! What, so slippery is a left wing crazy without any credibility at all for mistakenly misleading us to believe this site was published? I'll let you take that up with him!

 

Well if that's how we're playing.

Australians have never OWED as much !

 

LOL... You proclaim support for the policy and wish to discuss the failure of a ALP policy that was not even introduced. The fact that you tried to demonstrate your knowledge of the policy and the supposed come back of a policy that does not exist is extremely amusing.

The fact that you would appear to believe a comparison of credibility assumes you actually have some. The fact that Slippery was not aware of when the policy was scrapped is irrelevant due to the fact he did not then go on to attempt to state it was having a comeback... LOL it has to have been something to comeback too... LOL

Far better demonstration of what you believe is credible, which turns out to be nothing and your pretence of knowledge… LOL
So want to swing out with more insults to demonstrate your own lack of grey matter?

 

What on earth is he talking about......lol? This guy has got an extremely serious comprehension problem!
"I apparently supported the grocery watch".....there is no evidence of this!

"I apparently said that grocery watch was making a comeback"....yes I did!....but the strange thing is, it is making a comeback!!!!!!

You gotta give him something for trying, unfortunately his attempt to defame others is actually having the reverse effect.....my little nephew proudly wore his sheriffs badge he got out of a lucky dip, staunchly proclaiming to uphold the law.......I wonder if Garry is wearing one of these!

 

Wrong again, I simply requested that you back up your ststement. When you indulge yourself in the dreary tactic of silly speak and obfuscation, trying to bog the debate down in trivial stupidity, it naturally reflects on you very negatively. You not only lose, but you embarrass yourself into the bargain.

- - - Updated - - -

Wrong again, I simply requested that you back up your ststement. When you indulge yourself in the dreary tactic of silly speak and obfuscation, trying to bog the debate down in trivial stupidity, it naturally reflects on you very negatively. You not only lose, but you embarrass yourself into the bargain.

 

How old are you?

 

I guess suggesting that listing stores on a site that does not exist would be evidence enough. Comprehension problems? No when you are outright telling lies and pretending to have knowledge of a system that never even began. But let us look at your comments

Perhaps if you had checked, you would have seen it did not did not exist. BUT Nooo... You decide to buy into the foolish thought, just as you did not know the policy was scrapped, you will spread a rumour of the entirely ignorant.

Yes, it will make it interesting... HOW they list it, as it was scrapped... LOL

Yes, great come back... to what? It never even began... Oh that is right... another waste of millions trying to pretend the government cares... guess it could make a bigger sink hole eh? ... LOL

Give who something for trying? Rudd? Gillard? I would have thought fuel watch would have demonstrated exactly how foolish this policy was. BUT nooo... The government continued to push this policy which failed due to cost and effectiveness until they realised it was going to smash them on the return. AS IT HAS... LOL

Only the absurdly ignorant would bring the ALP failures and try to portray them to be reasonable effort... LOL

LOL... Are you really discussing Rudd? Apparently he is far better preferred than Gillard so again your assumptions show to be wrong. However, that being said, I would be surprised that there will be a change in leadership. The best saying I have heard was:

“Would changing the captain of the Titanic after hitting the iceberg have stopped the ship sinking?"

That is all you have? LOL desperation and twists, been caught in your ignorance and so you pretend and attempt insult to cover your own inadequacies... LOL

 

Ok, keep believing everything Abbott says because you can trust him.

 

Hahahahaha!!!! Unbelievable oh brother....."I" seriously can't help gigling!

 

Of course you cannot help to giggle... You actually have no idea what your talking about so you assume everybody else should be oblivious as yourself

 

Why? I bet your going to say you used a fistful of leaves or a sponge on a stick....I'm guessing the bidet is the order of the day now! Do you remember the old thunder boxes?

 

About six, I`d say.

 

If I cut it in half!

 

In all honesty, I don't think anyone has provided any major concern or evidence of these concerns for how labor have run the economy into the ground, it all seems to point to the contrary!

INTEREST RATES
You no longer hear the from the coalition that they are the government of "low interest rates! I suppose people have in general awoken to the facts surrounding interest rates and the furphy spun too many times! Just to reiterate an old fact, people are also slowly awakening to the fact that the government that oversaw the highest interest rates of any government were in fact the liberals....yes when Howard as treasurer!

ECONOMIC MANAGERS
A huge furphy is this sad line that the coalition always clean up labor's mess! One exceptional period of time during the Howard era was considered the "Always" factor! Again, without complete perspective of world standards! Labor was left with a sizeable government debt when Hawke took office without any plans or mechanisms to nullify this debts effects! You would think that many were confused what side of the political divide that Fraser and Hawke represented! The fact is that Australia was in a mess under a Fraser government, yes representing the right side of the political divide, and yes when Howard was treasurer!

Again Australia was struggling under a keating government but no where to the extent of the worlds struggles! Australia seemed to do quite well under a Howard government but so was the rest of the world, in fact the rest of the world were doing much better than Australia during this time! So how do Australians read our economic standing based on certain governance? You may just read this as biased commentary, but I say it is based on facts! We simply are hoodwinked into seeing our economics as one dimensional and those that know better....well, know better!

Again, if you can provide evidence of the contrary I'm all ears, broad one dimensional opinions and speculation simply doesn't cut it.....

 

WOFTAM to try to explain fiscal matters to anyone who doesn`t even recognise massive debt as a negative issue.

 

Is this a one dimensional comment? seems like it to me! There you have it folks, Australia has a massive debt, we are doomed!

 

You don`t need me to make you look silly.

 

Good players don't necessarily make good coaches!

 

You are free to and invited to contribute any facts you may have. oh right! Just more rhetoric then?

 

So no facts then that apply, just fear mongering over job losses that can be attributed to attrition in a declining global economy while carefully ignoring the fact of the numbers of jobs created in the same period? yeh i guess maybe if this was culldavs thread we would need that "selective" in the title huh

 

Thank god you dont teach math or economics

 

It's strange how the economy issue, which is so important does not attract any negative evidential references! It wouldn't have to do with taking news limited's word on it, now would it?