Comparing the Parties

Be truthfull now vegie, the $70 billion is an 'adgusted' figure in 2007 dollar values. The actuall sale values were around $46 billion. Labor sold off billions of dollars worth of public assets too but where Howard used ALL the procceds from sales to retire debt, Labor used NONE of the procceds from their sales to retire debt.

 

Mate, only bad governments accumulate debt and Hawke/Keating did sell assets, billions of dollars worth.

How many times do I have to tell you, the States are responsible for roads hospitals etc. They had plenty of funds but it was the Labor states that DID NOTHING.
Anyway, you just finished telling us "Educational outcomes were high. Health nsw had more beds in private and health sectors other than SA. Hopital admittance was low. The elective surgery report had nsw higher than all other states. Transport acheivement include, the m2, m5, eastern distributer and cross city tunnel". You can't have it both ways.

 

I think you'll find it was around 70 b from recollection. The gold reserves were sold for a ridiculously low price, which cost billions. Great economic managers these two were.

I don't think you'll find that billions were sold in assets under hawke/keating, they wanted to, but the base wouldn't let them.

We're not just talking NSW malena, NSW aren't the only federal jurisdiction that requires consideration. Infrastructure essentials are requirements that the labor government have commited to in their funding to improve health systems. Howards whole ideology was for small government! Which simply meant they didn't want responsibility for it. Australians were being hoodwinked by them and the media. Time to get a grip dude and start to face some facts about a government that only cared for the top echelon. They weren't the economic managers they were portrait to be, and you obviously got caught up in the illusion.

 

The NSW government did quite well in the circumstances. I think part of your rant about the state labor party was based on illusions as well, or should I say blissful ignorance

 

Read this, it might shatter some of your many illusions. http://www.petercostello.com.au/spe...-for-economic-development-of-australia-sydney

 

You are joking aren't you. Need an unbiased analysis, not one from the man himself! This is your problem malena.

 

You haven't done much research have you?

 

are u calling your article research.....lol! Common malena!

 

I reckon Peter is spot on. What facts in the speech are you disputing as being incorrect?

 

Right, Howard et al stuffed it in their mattress to look good and bribe voters at the next election, whilst labor used the money to save our economy.

 

I'm not calling it anything execpt what it is, a speech my the treasurer of the federal government of the day. The lack of research I referred to was in regard to your ignorant statement, "I don't think you'll find that billions were sold in assets under hawke/keating, they wanted to, but the base wouldn't let them." When someone says "I don't think" they are saying 'I don't know', and in this case you most certainly don't know.

 

AHHH AHA AHAHHHAAA!!! we won't let the truth get in the way of our political propaganda will we DV.

 

Sending out small cheques to the poor and giving unneeded contracts to union mates is as vote buying as you can get, it sures up the lower class heartland of the ALP, keeps the union mates afloat and supportive and allows the ALP to point at 'something' as taking action.

The reality is it was the capacity of interest rates to move downwards (after several quick rises right before the election by the 'independant' body making Howard look bad) so much that actually kept the wheels turning. This was because of the health of the banks which was a direct product of Howard/Costello's long term in government. Though in retrospect I think perhaps if we had not had such a surplus to be raided then the ALP might have actually done something less damaging considering the GFC effect on Australia is so much lower and drawn out then what the ALP expected and reacted for.

 

I don't think you can find anything to suggest labor sold assets to the extent you say. I certainly can't.

malena, I rest my case on your iron clad conclusion on costello's report. It says it all!

 

You're not looking hard enough vegie. They sold Quantas and the commonwealth bank for starters and you didn't read Peter Costello's speech did you. Pray tell what was my 'iron clad conclusion'??

 

6 billion compared to 72billion! hmmmm

 

So now you know, Labor DID sell billions of dollars worth of public assets. And it wasn't 72 billion it was 46 billion. Get it right mate. Now go and read Peter Costellos speech so you can learn what was so bad about what Labor did with the $6 billion proceeds from public asset sales.

 

it is still a take from costello. they state whatever they like. he says labor did this or that. do u really think this is gospel?.....lol

 

Facts are facts mate. Which facts are you disputing? Are you trying to say that Labor didn't sell over $6 billion worth of public assets? Are trying to say that they didn't use the procceds from those sales as operating capital? Are you trying to say that Labor didn't use any of those funds to retire existing debt? You would be wrong in very case. Are you trying to say that we have been given gospel by Keating and Swan but not from Costello? Ahhhh ah aha aha!!!! Surely you are not that stupid.

 

The source is still from costello. Politicians constantly paint a picture that is far from the truth. Costello's article is the only place i've seen this information, now this is not an evidence fact, it's from a personal bias. In any instance 6 billion is a far cry from 72 billion. Basically, your article cannot be considered fact.

 

So show us where you got your figure of $72 billion. Show us some evidence which says the figures given by Peter Costello are not right.

 

This may help you out. I think you will find a number of independant sources that suggest the same information.

http://australianpropertyforum.com/topic/9625940/1/

 

Dear me, you're not very good at this are you vegie. Try a google advanced search with the words - Hawke Keating asset sales - then try again with Howard Costello asset sales. The federal treasurey site has plenty of info too.

 

Been done malena, I mean you can't get too much clearer than this can ya. It is a independant source. I think it gives a clear insight. Good luck with continuing to find info to support your claim! Happy to check out other info you have that comes from an unbiased source.

 

AHHAHaAhAhh!!! an independant and unbiased source! ahahahhhaah!! You're telling us a blog on forum (and actually it is a blog quoted from another pro Labor forum), is unbiased??? how do you know it is unbiased? who wrote the blog? and you appear to be claiming this blog from an unkown person is more authoritive than the federal treasurey web site and a speech from the treasurer of the government of the day! and even your unkown blogger has 'adjusted' get that vegie, 'adjusted' the figure for the coalition. If we do the same adjustment to Labors $6 billion it turns into over $9 billion!