Sensational-Adelaide.com

How can you guys rip into Marshall when we've got Weatherall and Kouts? Struggling to see a difference here.

SRW wrote:It'd still be very high risk for Labor to go to an early election on this, as unprepared as the Liberals are. The banks would no doubt bankroll vigorous advertising during the campaign as did the miners against the Nationals in WA recently and as they did against federal Labor in 2013.

But like every election the union run campaigns against Liberal policies, it's a bit of tit for tat really.

I just like the fact we have two parties actually finding a difference.

Waewick wrote:

SRW wrote:It'd still be very high risk for Labor to go to an early election on this, as unprepared as the Liberals are. The banks would no doubt bankroll vigorous advertising during the campaign as did the miners against the Nationals in WA recently and as they did against federal Labor in 2013.

But like every election the union run campaigns against Liberal policies, it's a bit of tit for tat really.

I just like the fact we have two parties actually finding a difference.

Tit for tat? Not really IMO. Banks and miners are not acting on behalf of the Liberal party; they're self-interested corporate entities. They act on behalf of corporate not public interest, which is why it's sometimes concerning when through power of money they can unbalance public outcomes. Unions by contrast are (sometimes imperfect) representative bodies often formally organised into the political movement.

Waewick wrote:How can you guys rip into Marshall when we've got Weatherall and Kouts? Struggling to see a difference here.

Because the Liberals and Marshall are worse. Very simple.

No plans.
No policies.
No vision.
No substance.

All they have is telling us that Labor is bad.
Ok..so tell us how you're going to be better? Convince the state.
They haven't, they can't, and they more then likely won't again at the next election.
Marshall will now be hoping the banks help him.

Imagine that. A wealthy businessman hoping mega rich banks will help him win an election.

SRW wrote:

Waewick wrote:

SRW wrote:It'd still be very high risk for Labor to go to an early election on this, as unprepared as the Liberals are. The banks would no doubt bankroll vigorous advertising during the campaign as did the miners against the Nationals in WA recently and as they did against federal Labor in 2013.

But like every election the union run campaigns against Liberal policies, it's a bit of tit for tat really.

I just like the fact we have two parties actually finding a difference.

Tit for tat? Not really IMO. Banks and miners are not acting on behalf of the Liberal party; they're self-interested corporate entities. They act on behalf of corporate not public interest, which is why it's sometimes concerning when through power of money they can unbalance public outcomes. Unions by contrast are (sometimes imperfect) representative bodies often formally organised into the political movement.

The unions are 100% self interest as well.

I'm not defending big companies as they do look out for themselves. But unions are hardly angels

It would be great if our parties were funded centrally to avoid this issue.

rev wrote:

Waewick wrote:How can you guys rip into Marshall when we've got Weatherall and Kouts? Struggling to see a difference here.

Because the Liberals and Marshall are worse. Very simple.

No plans.
No policies.
No vision.
No substance.

All they have is telling us that Labor is bad.
Ok..so tell us how you're going to be better? Convince the state.
They haven't, they can't, and they more then likely won't again at the next election.
Marshall will now be hoping the banks help him.

Imagine that. A wealthy businessman hoping mega rich banks will help him win an election.

The same way the shop workers union has handed elections to Labor?

Will be intetesting to see how Mr X and The backwards party go if there is an election.

citywatcher wrote:Guess we got more southern expressways retractable lights rerouted tapleys hills roads etc to look fwd too then.

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

With the benefit of hindsight I think people are a bit harsh on the Olson government. They were elected to do one thing, and one thing only and that was to fix the absolute disaster of the states finances post State Bank debacle. They did this mainly by privatising ETSA, but people also forget that the state was virtually bankrupt. So the one way expressway was always intended to be a temporary measure, but was actually quite fit for purpose. That government also commenced the Mt Barker freeway and heysen tunnels at a time when trucks were regularly toppling over causing havoc. On the public transport front, the Red Hens were finally fazed out with the rollout of the 3000 cars. In fact, they probably achieved more than the first term of the Rann government infrastructure wise.

As a Liberal you should be more worried about Cory Bernardi and his growing Australian Conservatives party rather than Nick Xenophon and his party. It's only a matter of time before several high profile and popular Liberals and other political figures join Australian Conservatives. He's just registered the SA branch meaning they will be contesting the march election.

Costello once warned that Turnbull would destroy the Liberal party.

Waewick wrote:

SRW wrote: Tit for tat? Not really IMO. Banks and miners are not acting on behalf of the Liberal party; they're self-interested corporate entities. They act on behalf of corporate not public interest, which is why it's sometimes concerning when through power of money they can unbalance public outcomes. Unions by contrast are (sometimes imperfect) representative bodies often formally organised into the political movement.

The unions are 100% self interest as well.

I'm not defending big companies as they do look out for themselves. But unions are hardly angels

It would be great if our parties were funded centrally to avoid this issue.

Unions are by definition a collective. They represent the collective interest of workers. Corporations represent the often opaque interests of private money. That's my concern when they attempt overbearing influence of public policy.

And the SDA hasn't handed Labor any elections though certainly it has handed aligned members positions in the Labor goverment. Which leads us to the imperfect caveat of my above statement, but that's a separate discussion.

claybro wrote: So the one way expressway was always intended to be a temporary measure, but was actually quite fit for purpose.

Surely southern expressway and heysen tunnels were nearly entirely funded by federal money. If the state was broke or not would have made little difference.
The one way freeway was federal liberals gift to sa.

GoodSmackUp wrote:Looks like Jay's next target is Rupert Murdoch himself

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-23/s ... rs/8644050

Good hopefully they do go after the Murdoch media.

They use their position to influence politics.
Right now there's an article on Steven Marshall "slamming" Labors economic management.
That article is free to read and not behind the paywall.

There's an article about pharmaceutical companies wining and dining doctors to influence them into prescribing certain treatments/medicines. That is a topic that is of massive concern and importance to the whole community.
But this hugely important topic is behind the paywall.

They know you'll click the free stuff to read, and only glance over the few sentences shown for the paywalled stuff.

Might seem insignificant to some but this is text book manipulation.

This is another example of why South Australia needs another daily paper to break the monopoly News Corp have.

SRW wrote:

Waewick wrote:

SRW wrote: Tit for tat? Not really IMO. Banks and miners are not acting on behalf of the Liberal party; they're self-interested corporate entities. They act on behalf of corporate not public interest, which is why it's sometimes concerning when through power of money they can unbalance public outcomes. Unions by contrast are (sometimes imperfect) representative bodies often formally organised into the political movement.

The unions are 100% self interest as well.

I'm not defending big companies as they do look out for themselves. But unions are hardly angels

It would be great if our parties were funded centrally to avoid this issue.

Unions are by definition a collective. They represent the collective interest of workers. Corporations represent the often opaque interests of private money. That's my concern when they attempt overbearing influence of public policy.

And the SDA hasn't handed Labor any elections though certainly it has handed aligned members positions in the Labor goverment. Which leads us to the imperfect caveat of my above statement, but that's a separate discussion.

I think we are going to disagree on this.

rev wrote:As a Liberal you should be more worried about Cory Bernardi and his growing Australian Conservatives party rather than Nick Xenophon and his party. It's only a matter of time before several high profile and popular Liberals and other political figures join Australian Conservatives. He's just registered the SA branch meaning they will be contesting the march election.

Costello once warned that Turnbull would destroy the Liberal party.

I think both major parties will be worried.

claybro wrote:

citywatcher wrote:Guess we got more southern expressways retractable lights rerouted tapleys hills roads etc to look fwd too then.

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

With the benefit of hindsight I think people are a bit harsh on the Olson government. They were elected to do one thing, and one thing only and that was to fix the absolute disaster of the states finances post State Bank debacle. They did this mainly by privatising ETSA, but people also forget that the state was virtually bankrupt. So the one way expressway was always intended to be a temporary measure, but was actually quite fit for purpose. That government also commenced the Mt Barker freeway and heysen tunnels at a time when trucks were regularly toppling over causing havoc. On the public transport front, the Red Hens were finally fazed out with the rollout of the 3000 cars. In fact, they probably achieved more than the first term of the Rann government infrastructure wise.

Rewriting history ?

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

With the benefit of hindsight I think people are a bit harsh on the Olson government. They were elected to do one thing, and one thing only and that was to fix the absolute disaster of the states finances post State Bank debacle. They did this mainly by privatising ETSA, but people also forget that the state was virtually bankrupt. So the one way expressway was always intended to be a temporary measure, but was actually quite fit for purpose. That government also commenced the Mt Barker freeway and heysen tunnels at a time when trucks were regularly toppling over causing havoc. On the public transport front, the Red Hens were finally fazed out with the rollout of the 3000 cars. In fact, they probably achieved more than the first term of the Rann government infrastructure wise.

Privatising ETSA has made prices go up. When people are paying high electricity bills they are spending less money on goods and services which means less revenue for the state from tax revenue. Businesses then need to cutback on wages and hours, the staff are then not shopping as much, dining out and creating tax revenue.

Also lets say they put a toll price on the Southern Expressway when they opened it in exchange for public transport improvements, improvements like electrifying the Noarlunga Centre Line.

Could the RedHens been kept in service a little longer whilst the lines were improved, electrified and new electric trains built not dirty diesel railcars.