Cleaves NEWSWIRE [Cleaves Newswire has been decommissioned but will remain online as a resource and to preserve backlinks; new site here.] Independent Open Publishing
 
"Freedom and Peace are earned not bestowed" -- Anon
» Gallery

Search

search comments
advanced search
printable version
PDF version

Kevin Rudd: ask any prancer!
by dingo Thursday, Mar 13 2008, 10:50pm
national / social/political / opinion/analysis

The new Australian PM is proving himself to be a major letdown, disappointment, non-event; a man of the status quo UNABLE TO HANDLE THE BIG ISSUES! A man defined and managed by big business, especially the financial and mining sectors, the two sectors responsible for wreaking havoc on the economy and environment!

It is now clear, beyond doubt; our current PM is a SHOW PONY, a wanna-be media darling – and he’s even proving to be an inept ‘prancer!’

After watching Rudd ‘cave’ badly in parliament over demands made by the opposition on a pensioner payout issue; witnessing his clearly inept management of the economy over a considerable period, especially his mishandling of the rapacious Transnationals; the last straw comes in the form of the current toothless Haneef ‘inquiry’– the inquiry you have when you’re not having an inquiry! A Claytons PM and a Claytons inquiry!

We are forced to face the obvious, our new PM, Kevin Rudd, is an ineffective lackey and show pony who sought only to be PM for its own sake – no plans, no vision but especially NO REPRESENTATION for the majority of Australians. A Labor tragedy, prancing!

Rudd is just another servile corporate lackey and American slave; the hopes of the nation have been dashed on the rocks of vanity, incompetence and lack of character.

WE ARE ALL SORRY, KEVIN! Not only for Aborigines, who continue to face the same appalling conditions they faced BEFORE your media performance; we are SORRY FOR THE ENTIRE NATION AND ALL ITS PEOPLE.

Where have all the TALENTED Aussies gone? To the private sector everyone!

The economic problems are easily rectified with an equitable approach; those who reap/rape most from the nation owe most to the nation – it is a criminal injustice that a nation of only 20 million suffers economic stress when the nation is exploited for hundreds of billions per year by the Corporate sector. Is this the “fair go” you promised everyone, Kevin?

The Libs are no better, their $610 billion national debt blow-out is proof of the FACT.

So where does the nation go from here? Wherever America and the Transnationals tell it!

When will WE ever learn? [Probably never!]

America is a good indicator of mass paralysis in times of great need. The sheeple are fit for the slaughter, as always! Too frightened to move in any direction they forfeit their sovereignty for slavery. Led by the most transparent lies, machinations and blatant injustices – THEY CAN’T GET ENOUGH!

COMMENTS

show latest comments first   show comment titles only

jump to comment 1

Rudd the biggest enemy of the nation's battlers
by Mirko Bagaric via reed - The Age Friday, Mar 14 2008, 8:02am

LOW-INCOME earners didn't break the economy and it's not up to them to fix it. The biggest enemy of "working families" is not inflation — it is Kevin Rudd and his offensive suggestion that the working poor and middle Australia should show restraint in wage negotiations. The Rudd Government has reportedly even rejected Treasury's recommendation that the Fair Pay Commission should award a measly $18 a week pay rise to low-paid workers.

People are not morally obliged to remedy problems not of their doing. Families that are struggling to afford life's necessities have made no contribution to rising costs and it's for that reason they owe nothing to the rest of the community when it comes to wage negotiations. The Opposition's Malcolm Turnbull nailed it when he said the main causes of growing inflation were increased global fuel and food costs.

Imposing the same wage discipline on rich and poor is a contemptible case of economic discrimination. Rich and poor come from different starting points in their capacity to attain any degree of human flourishing. Even slight reductions in purchasing power are felt far more by those who are already wanting. Being forced to sell the family home hurts more than having to think twice before choosing to fly first or business class on the next family vacation.

Rudd's decision not to legislate a wage rise for federal politicians is a meaningless gesture when it comes to setting the tone for how many other Australians should behave. The financial pressures experienced by politicians, with their $100,000-plus annual incomes and brimming superannuation entitlements, are negligible compared with those people now battling to save the roof over their head.

Recent data from the Real Estate Institute of Australia shows that the average family can no longer afford the average home mortgage. Close to half the average family's post-tax income (or 37.4% of gross median family income — the affordability figure is regarded as 30%) is now required to pay the mortgage. This is the worst result in the 22 years since the survey began.

And for loyal Labor-voting families thinking about taking Rudd's advice and not agitating for a pay increase, unfortunately the news is not much better on the rental market. Rent costs families an average of 23.9% of gross median income — a 0.6% increase in three months.

There is a chance that an above-CPI wage increase to lowly paid workers might further drive up inflation. But this is not something middle Australia should consider. Any increase in inflation will necessarily be less than their wage increase, so in absolute terms they would still be better off. But won't this encourage high-income earners to also go hard when it comes to wage negotiations? Not at all. High-income earners already do that — always have and always will.

Admittedly, the reaches of our moral and civic duties are not confined to redressing problems of our doing. In some cases, individuals are required to step up to help another person or to make sacrifices for the good of the community, even in relation to matters not of their doing.

But the circumstances in which they are required to act with such benevolence are rare. The situations in which we have a responsibility to redress problems caused by others is defined by the maxim of positive duty, which prescribes that we must help others in serious trouble, when assistance would immensely help them at little or no inconvenience to ourselves.

The principle explains why it is repugnant to refuse to throw a rope to a person drowning near a pier, but we are entitled to resist calls to allow a homeless person to move into our spare bedroom.

It also explains why developing countries are entitled to refuse to adopt greenhouse targets. Global warming has been caused solely by Western nations that, on the back of cheap energy, have increased the prosperity of their people while refusing to share the largesse with the largely hungry developing world. People in those nations are no less entitled to improve their lot.

Why should the developing world care that their use of fossil fuel risks making the future less prosperous? Current destitution bites more harshly than potential future discomfort. If Western nations are genuinely concerned by global warming, they need to compensate the developing world for fossil fuel restraint. Absent this, their hypocritical environmental concerns will rightly continue to fall on deaf ears in the developing world.

In relation to matters of flourishing on the home front, middle Australia is the constituency feeling the economic pinch and is immensely inconvenienced by rising costs. That's why it is offensive for the PM or any other person to urge middle Australians to show wage restraint. Middle Australians need, and are entitled to, every last cent they can secure in the form of wage increases.

Moreover, they should not only be leaning on their employers to improve their lot, the Government also needs to step in here. Most Australians will welcome the proposed midyear tax cuts. But their problem — as always — is that they will most benefit the rich.

It is mindless that any Australian living below the poverty line should be required to pay any tax, especially given that they are then subsidised by the welfare system. This is bureaucratic nonsense and socially and economically unjustified. About 10% of Australians are living below the poverty line (about $700 a week for a family of four).

Here's a question for the 1000 "brainiacs" at the Rudd 2020 Summit: What is one good reason for not increasing the tax-free threshold to the poverty line?

Dr Mirko Bagaric is a lawyer and author.

© 2008 Fairfax Digital


 
<< back to stories
 

© 2005-2025 Cleaves Alternative News.
Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial re-use, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere.
Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by Cleaves Alternative News.
Disclaimer | Privacy [ text size >> ]