• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: Tronica

Politics in 2004

who are you voting for?

  • liberal/the nationals

    Votes: 18 20.0%
  • labor

    Votes: 20 22.2%
  • the greens

    Votes: 49 54.4%
  • the democrats

    Votes: 1 1.1%
  • another minor party

    Votes: 2 2.2%
  • i don't know

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • i don't care

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • i don't vote (non-australian citizen)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    90
onetwothreefour said:
^^^ anna, and all liberal voters: what do you have to say in response to: gay rights, tampa, refugees in a general sense, public versus private schooling, iraq, our relationship with dubya and the u.s.?
anyone... :)

Hey anna you didn't answer 1234's Questions ................. ??

(sorry I'm interested also)
 
Labor’s New Deal to Save Medicare
Julia Gillard - Shadow Minister for Health, Manager of Opposition Business in the House of Representatives and Mark Latham - Federal Labor Leader
Get

PDF
Policy Statement - 6 September 2004

A Federal Labor Government will save Medicare before it's too late.

Labor will immediately lift the Medicare patient rebate for all bulk billed consultations to 100 percent of the scheduled fee.

This is the centrepiece of our plan to restore bulk billing rates to around 80 per cent – reversing the decline to 70 per cent under the Howard Government.

We will combine the increase in the patient rebate with powerful incentives for doctors to bulk bill, ensuring that bulk billing doctors are available in communities around the country.

This is part of Labor's $3.4 billion commitment to reverse the collapse in bulk billing and keep health care affordable for all Australians.

Only Labor believes in Medicare because we understand it relieves financial pressures on families.
Labor's plan

Labor will restore affordability in health care by:

* Immediately increasing the Medicare patient rebate for all bulk billed consultations to 100 per cent of the scheduled fee – an average increase of $5.00 per consultation.
* Providing an additional $7,500 each year for doctors in metropolitan areas who bulk bill 80 per cent or more of their patients.
* Providing an additional $15,000 per year for doctors in outer metropolitan and major regional centres who bulk bill 75 per cent or more of their patients.
* Providing an additional $22,500 per year for doctors in rural and remote areas who bulk bill 70 percent or more of their patients.
* Combining these two initiatives, on average we lift the patient rebate by $6.30 in metropolitan areas, $7.80 in outer metropolitan areas and major regional centres, and $9.60 in rural and remote areas for doctors who reach targets.
* Addressing critical workforce shortages including creating 3125 undergraduate nursing places by 2008-09 and 500 full time postgraduate nursing HECS places in areas of specialisation.



Labor will also attract and retain more doctors and nurses in the health system, to ensure all Australians have access to high quality health care.
 
Okay..

I do believe that a fair chunk of Howard's moral standpoints (like re: gay marriage) are just reflections of whoever is in power in the US. I think his involvement in the war and those related issues are mostly brown-nosing Bush. And because I don't believe Bush will be re-elected, and I have a lot more respect for Kerry's standings on some of those issues, I'm not swayed by those things in regards to this election.

My opinion on private vs. public schooling is biased because I was private schooled my whole life and the public schools in the area I live in get plenty of funding in addition to what the government gives them. So to be honest, that's just not high on my agenda. Neither are refugees. They're just not stand-out issues that I'm concerned with at this moment in time.

No one person is going to be able to make the world a better place for everyone - refugees, Iraqis, homosexuals - so I base my vote on the person I think will most benefit myself and the people closest to me. If I want to make a difference in those other issues, I will do something myself - become a missionary, a soldier, etc. If I want to see changes made in public health and in family assistance, which are issues that matter to me, I will vote for someone who actually does, literally, have the power to make some of those changes in a way that benefits me.

If safe havens for refugees are a top priority for someone else, they can use their vote to do something they think will make a difference to that issue. I won't be using my one vote to do anything but try to resolve the issues that are important to me.

:)
 
waz, Labor's changes will only affect doctors who bulk bill. There is only one doctor in a 10km radius of me who bulk bills (and I don't have a car), and none who bulk bill obstetric care. Hence why Liberal's changes are more appealing to me.
 
GPs the winners, not patients: experts
By Carol Nader
September 7, 2004

The architect of the Medicare system has warned that the Government's plan to increase the rebate will encourage doctors to lift charges without passing on savings to patients.

Professor John Deeble said there was no guarantee that the Government's plan to lift the Medicare rebate from $25.70 to $30.20 for a standard consultation would "actually get through to the people".

"The risk in the Government's plan is how much is going to drift off into higher incomes for doctors, and not lower charges to patients?" he said. "It might not be passed on."

Professor Deeble said Labor's plan had "very strong" incentives for bulk-billing, and he believed the policy would achieve the desired effect of lifting bulk-billing rates to 80 per cent.

"In the case where a doctor gets a $15,000 a year bonus for bulk-billing at 75 per cent, any doctor who's already bulk-billing at 60 per cent is better off getting the bonus for bulk-billing than he would be by charging a patient $45 each," he said.


It was a fear echoed by the Doctors Reform Society of Victoria. President Tim Woodruff said doctors, who had long felt undervalued and underpaid, would cash in on the higher rebate.

"Many of these doctors are simply going to say this is a well-deserved increase in our income and continue to charge the extra payment," Dr Woodruff said.

Medical academics said both policies failed to consider the bigger issues.

The director of Sydney University's Australian Health Policy Institute, Professor Stephen Leeder, said both parties had missed the point if they thought voters were most concerned about bulk-billing rates.

"The essential issue is can you see a GP at reasonable cost? Can you get drugs at reasonable cost? Can you get into hospital when you need to?" he said.

"I don't think these are big reforms at all. It's correcting an anomaly," he said.

"When you actually put that in the perspective of what needs to be done in the health system, this is very small stuff."

Professor Richardson said the entire health debate had been simplified to the matter of reimbursing GPs...


http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/09/06/1094322715093.html
 
Voting for Howard because of his health policy is merely playing into his sense of oppurtunism, the Howard government doesn't care for protecting Medicare, this is a ruse to win votes plain and simple. They want to placate voter concerns in this an election year while doing everything they can to undermine it in the in between years.
 
That's what election time is about. I'm not going to vote for Latham because Howard made a Medicare promise, that's completely nonsensical. If Howard doesn't implement it, I won't have lost anything because Latham's new policies (which he's also released during election time - what's the difference?) don't apply to me.
 
^ Well maybe you don't see being duped into voting for a politician to get your healthcare improved and then not getting your healthcare improved a big loss. But think of the rest of us who have to deal with the rest of Howard's fucked up policies for the next few years...

I think this article is extremely relevant:

A COMMENT ON RESPONSIBLE VOTING, AND A PROTOCOL FOR A USEFUL VOTE
By Greg Graffin


Voting is a privilege. As such it requires responsibility. Irresponsibility when coupled with licence can lead to social tragedy. If one is to feel good about his or her vote, it is necessary to have an agenda to use as justification, and also to adhere to some sort of ideological protocol for casting a particular vote. Too often in the past, our generation has voted and formed opinion based on self-serving interests. "I know what is good for me, and I don’t really care about what is good for others, I will vote for the candidate or issue that benefits me the most" is a common way of thinking. This is an example of the simplest possible voting convention. It doesn’t require much worldly knowledge or social concern, it is simply a selfish desire for personal gain. This will probably typify most people’s thinking on their way to the polls this year, as it has in years past. But it does not make for a better society. Voting offers us a way to responsibly improve society. If you don’t care about such a goal, then voting isn’t a privilege for you, it's just a routine behavior that happens every four years, or worse, a way to implement evil policies that further degrade the lives of the careless and powerless. If you don’t care about improvement, you better hope that those who do go to the polls advocate your interests.

Societal improvement is a somewhat nebulous concept because change is rarely teleological and it rests in the whims of the populace. Most people think that a candidate who wins an election can make the world a better place. This has rarely happened in history. It is the people, or the ruled, who make the world a better place by behavioral changes, and the ruler is usually only a by-product of this collective phenomenon. The process of voting, because it demands sharing of information, requires people to gain knowledge about their world. It offers an opportunity to question whether they accept the tenets of their representatives and of their society. When this occurs, people get informed, people can communicate their distastes, and their hopes. They feel useful and acknowledged by their fellow citizens. And through communication comes action, and eventual abatement of the stigmas that cause suffering and misery. An informed person is a content person. An informed society is a strong society, supportive of its citizens, aware of, and compassionate to those less advantaged. Finally, an informed vote is a responsible vote. It goes far beyond the election in question. The knowledge is carried through the life of the possessor, and it shapes the way that person views his/her position in society and communicates with others. All of this is a contribution to a better community and a more meaningful election.

AN UNORTHODOX PROTOCOL FOR CASTING A MEANINGFUL VOTE:

1 Determine whether you care about the general well-being of society (If you do not, skip to step 7, if you do, continue on)

2. Determine whether you are a privileged citizen (If you are not, then proceed to step number 6, if you are, read steps 3, 4, and 5 only)

3. Examine not how well you will fare if a given issue is voted into law, but how poorly the under-privileged will suffer (no matter which laws pass a vote or who is voted into office, you will probably always still be better off than the people you fear you’ll become, namely the under-privileged).

4. Create an ideological balance-sheet that details how much better you will fare, as a percentage of your current comfort level, versus how much worse the under-privileged will drop in their current comfort level (for instance, as a very banal example, a mere 2% drop in your current income, could provide a tremendous relative rise in an under-privileged household’s income).

5. Vote for the issue or candidate that promises to balance the disparity between the privileged and the under-privileged classes, even if it doesn’t make you richer or if it provides a small compromise in your day-to-day comfort.

6. Vote for the issue or the candidate who will make your life better.

7. Abstain from voting

Finally, remember voting started out as a way for concerned citizens to play a role in creating a society that was good for all. Over time it evolved into the monstrosity it is today which is no more than a vehicle for selfish partisanism, and worse, a voice for those who want the law to preserve and increase the disparity between needy and privileged.

This unfortunate turn of events has made us a hostile, hopeless people. We should remember that history is relevant, and can help us gain a perspective on our current situation. NO civilization persists without a strong sense of social welfare. The British empire expired once its subjects learned that through unity and enlightenment of the underprivileged came a new power structure and a new sense of national community, one strong enough to turn away any possible oppressors. We are headed in the same direction as the failed British empire as our privileged class increases in wealth yet shrinks in population, and our underclass grows in population and shrinks in wealth.

Your vote is meaningless if it merely bolsters the selfish desires of a small privileged minority of citizens. A meaningful vote depends on the passage of issues or election of candidates that help to create a better scene for everyone, not merely the rich elite, and not merely provisional support for the poor. If you follow these guidelines, we will have a less polarized, more enthusiastic underclass, and a less greedy, more compassionate upper class; and the quality of our social fabric will be drastically enhanced.
 
See, this is what I'm talking about. You "having to deal with Howard" is no different from me "having to deal with Latham". That's why we're each allowed to vote. Medicare certainly isn't my only reason to vote Liberal, and damned if I'm going to let a bunch of bluelighters tell me which way I should be voting, to attempt to sway my vote, to imply that I shouldn't vote or that I'm voting "wrong". It's completely personal and we all have our reasons for voting the way we do.
 
anna! said:
Latham's new policies (which he's also released during election time - what's the difference?) don't apply to me.


No offense anna! but to me you come across as VERY selfish.So,many of your posts have 'me' ,'me' in them.Just what YOU can get out of it.You appear to be voting 'Liberal' just for your own selfish reasons :(

For myself,I'm voting 'Greens' because I feel there policies are good for the overall of this country NOT just me.I'm looking at the BIG PICTURE eg: Higher funding for Universities and NOT a 'user pays system' that the well off can only afford.I believe in equal opportunity for all.

I'm actually,well off myself, but feel this government is taking away opportunities for the less well off(User pays system) and it's at the cost of this country "giving people a fair go" and being a 'caring society'.

Sure 'Greens' won't get into power("I'm directing my prefences to 'Labor'"), but if they get enough votes there 'positive policies' MAY be picked up by the 'Labor' party.

NO Way the 'Liberal' party will - They currently just encourage people to be selfish and use 'fear' eg: Scaring people by saying under 'Labor' interest rates will rise alot.A shame the 'Reserve Bank' predicts that they will rise by the end of the year no matter who wins the election.Also,economy experts say "John Howard is using 'fear' to 'scare' people that interest rates will rise alot under 'Labor' when they feel under Mark Latham this will NOT be the case.

Finally,anna! for someone that says who you vote for is personal, you have a lot to say publicly on a 'public message board'.
 
lostpunk5545 said:
^ Well maybe you don't see being duped into voting for a politician to get your healthcare improved and then not getting your healthcare improved a big loss. But think of the rest of us who have to deal with the rest of Howard's fucked up policies for the next few years...

I think this article is extremely relevant:

A COMMENT ON RESPONSIBLE VOTING, AND A PROTOCOL FOR A USEFUL VOTE
By Greg Graffin


Voting is a privilege. As such it requires responsibility. Irresponsibility when coupled with licence can lead to social tragedy. If one is to feel good about his or her vote, it is necessary to have an agenda to use as justification, and also to adhere to some sort of ideological protocol for casting a particular vote. Too often in the past, our generation has voted and formed opinion based on self-serving interests. "I know what is good for me, and I don’t really care about what is good for others, I will vote for the candidate or issue that benefits me the most" is a common way of thinking. This is an example of the simplest possible voting convention. It doesn’t require much worldly knowledge or social concern, it is simply a selfish desire for personal gain. This will probably typify most people’s thinking on their way to the polls this year, as it has in years past. But it does not make for a better society. Voting offers us a way to responsibly improve society. If you don’t care about such a goal, then voting isn’t a privilege for you, it's just a routine behavior that happens every four years, or worse, a way to implement evil policies that further degrade the lives of the careless and powerless. If you don’t care about improvement, you better hope that those who do go to the polls advocate your interests.

Societal improvement is a somewhat nebulous concept because change is rarely teleological and it rests in the whims of the populace. Most people think that a candidate who wins an election can make the world a better place. This has rarely happened in history. It is the people, or the ruled, who make the world a better place by behavioral changes, and the ruler is usually only a by-product of this collective phenomenon. The process of voting, because it demands sharing of information, requires people to gain knowledge about their world. It offers an opportunity to question whether they accept the tenets of their representatives and of their society. When this occurs, people get informed, people can communicate their distastes, and their hopes. They feel useful and acknowledged by their fellow citizens. And through communication comes action, and eventual abatement of the stigmas that cause suffering and misery. An informed person is a content person. An informed society is a strong society, supportive of its citizens, aware of, and compassionate to those less advantaged. Finally, an informed vote is a responsible vote. It goes far beyond the election in question. The knowledge is carried through the life of the possessor, and it shapes the way that person views his/her position in society and communicates with others. All of this is a contribution to a better community and a more meaningful election.

AN UNORTHODOX PROTOCOL FOR CASTING A MEANINGFUL VOTE:

1 Determine whether you care about the general well-being of society (If you do not, skip to step 7, if you do, continue on)

2. Determine whether you are a privileged citizen (If you are not, then proceed to step number 6, if you are, read steps 3, 4, and 5 only)

3. Examine not how well you will fare if a given issue is voted into law, but how poorly the under-privileged will suffer (no matter which laws pass a vote or who is voted into office, you will probably always still be better off than the people you fear you’ll become, namely the under-privileged).

4. Create an ideological balance-sheet that details how much better you will fare, as a percentage of your current comfort level, versus how much worse the under-privileged will drop in their current comfort level (for instance, as a very banal example, a mere 2% drop in your current income, could provide a tremendous relative rise in an under-privileged household’s income).

5. Vote for the issue or candidate that promises to balance the disparity between the privileged and the under-privileged classes, even if it doesn’t make you richer or if it provides a small compromise in your day-to-day comfort.

6. Vote for the issue or the candidate who will make your life better.

7. Abstain from voting

Finally, remember voting started out as a way for concerned citizens to play a role in creating a society that was good for all. Over time it evolved into the monstrosity it is today which is no more than a vehicle for selfish partisanism, and worse, a voice for those who want the law to preserve and increase the disparity between needy and privileged.

This unfortunate turn of events has made us a hostile, hopeless people. We should remember that history is relevant, and can help us gain a perspective on our current situation. NO civilization persists without a strong sense of social welfare. The British empire expired once its subjects learned that through unity and enlightenment of the underprivileged came a new power structure and a new sense of national community, one strong enough to turn away any possible oppressors. We are headed in the same direction as the failed British empire as our privileged class increases in wealth yet shrinks in population, and our underclass grows in population and shrinks in wealth.

Your vote is meaningless if it merely bolsters the selfish desires of a small privileged minority of citizens. A meaningful vote depends on the passage of issues or election of candidates that help to create a better scene for everyone, not merely the rich elite, and not merely provisional support for the poor. If you follow these guidelines, we will have a less polarized, more enthusiastic underclass, and a less greedy, more compassionate upper class; and the quality of our social fabric will be drastically enhanced.


GREAT post ;) and I agree with the points of this article 100% :D .
 
As for my reasons for voting being selfish, that depends on your definition.

My main reasons are things that affect my kids. Now, my kids are more important to me than any amount of refugees. If I want to vote this way because I think it will benefit my kids to have cheaper health care or better family support networks so I don't have to work full-time and put them in daycare, then that's that. I'm not voting Liberal because any of this will benefit me. IMO, that's not selfish. It's a mother trying to make the decisions she thinks are right on behalf of her kids. If I get it wrong, at least I can maintain that I did what I thought was best.

Kids > refugees.

Adding..

Finally,anna! for someone that says who you vote for is personal, you have a lot to say publicly on a 'public message board'.


Personal = my own. I don't have qualms with making my own reasons public knowledge, especially if people ask for clarification. And no one else should either.
 
Oh lawd save us from the cult-of-the-children!!! 8( 8( 8(

Bill Hicks, on the 'miracle' of childbirth: "No more than a miracle than eating food and a turd coming out of your ass. It's a chemical reaction, that's all it fucking is. If, you you wanna know what a miracle is. Raisin' a kid that doesn't talk in a movie theatre. Okay, there, there, there is a goddam miracle. It's not a miracle if every nine months any yin yang in the world can drop a litter of mewling cabbages on our planet... let's figure out this food/air deal okay? Okay. I'm just weird, you know? How about have a neat world for kids to come to?"
 
Last edited:
7. Abstain from voting

Finally, remember voting started out as a way for concerned citizens to play a role in creating a society that was good for all. Over time it evolved into the monstrosity it is today which is no more than a vehicle for selfish partisanism, and worse, a voice for those who want the law to preserve and increase the disparity between needy and privileged.

This unfortunate turn of events has made us a hostile, hopeless people. We should remember that history is relevant, and can help us gain a perspective on our current situation. NO civilization persists without a strong sense of social welfare. The British empire expired once its subjects learned that through unity and enlightenment of the underprivileged came a new power structure and a new sense of national community, one strong enough to turn away any possible oppressors. We are headed in the same direction as the failed British empire as our privileged class increases in wealth yet shrinks in population, and our underclass grows in population and shrinks in wealth.

Your vote is meaningless if it merely bolsters the selfish desires of a small privileged minority of citizens. A meaningful vote depends on the passage of issues or election of candidates that help to create a better scene for everyone, not merely the rich elite, and not merely provisional support for the poor. If you follow these guidelines, we will have a less polarized, more enthusiastic underclass, and a less greedy, more compassionate upper class; and the quality of our social fabric will be drastically enhanced.

Hear, hear! VIVA LA ANARCHISTA!!!
 
anna! said:
As for my reasons for voting being selfish, that depends on your definition.

My main reasons are things that affect my kids. Now, my kids are more important to me than any amount of refugees. If I want to vote this way because I think it will benefit my kids to have cheaper health care or better family support networks so I don't have to work full-time and put them in daycare, then that's that. I'm not voting Liberal because any of this will benefit me. IMO, that's not selfish. It's a mother trying to make the decisions she thinks are right on behalf of her kids. If I get it wrong, at least I can maintain that I did what I thought was best.

Kids > refugees.

Adding..

Finally,anna! for someone that says who you vote for is personal, you have a lot to say publicly on a 'public message board'.


Personal = my own. I don't have qualms with making my own reasons public knowledge, especially if people ask for clarification. And no one else should either.

anna! I still consider that selfish because you are looking at YOUR kids(A selfish narrow scope,NOT what is best for the country) and yourself which you mentioned with the term "me" in many posts.

Also,how can you believe that you will get 'cheaper health care' and 'better family support networks' under this current 'Liberal' government when John Howard has no creditability with a history of lieing,core & non-core promises.He does NOT take responsibility with what he says and does eg: NO W.M.D's for the reason to invade Iraq.Instead he passes the buck.The buck stops with the prime minister,sorry John (Sorry a word John Howard can't say either :( )

anna! can he be trusted to deliver this? Or is it a non-core promise?

I guess your views are NOW 'personal public' too.
 
Okay, if you consider that selfish then yes, I am selfish. My kids are my top priority and no amount of refugees will change that. Sorry to disappoint!

Please hold the line while I look into my Crystal Ball Of Political Foresight 8) I don't know if Howard is going to lie about it or not, but I'm prepared to take that chance because the benefit would be great. If you want to be less selfish than I am, that's great, but I don't care!

I don't know how many times I can explain the same thing over and over before people stop asking me to justify what I'm saying. I've given you my reasons.
 
anna! said:
Okay, if you consider that selfish then yes, I am selfish. My kids are my top priority and no amount of refugees will change that. Sorry to disappoint!

Please hold the line while I look into my Crystal Ball Of Political Foresight 8) I don't know if Howard is going to lie about it or not, but I'm prepared to take that chance because the benefit would be great. If you want to be less selfish than I am, that's great, but I don't care!

I don't know how many times I can explain the same thing over and over before people stop asking me to justify what I'm saying. I've given you my reasons.

The Crystal ball comment is illogical.It comes down to 'trust','creditability' and 'honesty'.I'm pointing out if he continues to lie, how can you(Or ANYONE,including ME too of course) tell what he will deliver or NOT.I NEVER said predict the future :p.

The 'I don't care' comment, also says another reason why you are a current federal 'Liberal' voter.Selfishness being a key trait of many of them.

You are NOT being forced to reply.If you choice to reply and defend your view, that's your choice.
 
Top