Quote:The electorate also has a long memory,

Ours doesn't seem to. Australians tend to vote along traditional party lines. We call these people "donkey voters". Elections in this country are decided by between 3-5% of swinging voters,who appear to vote with their hip pocket.

Mandatory voting does not appear to create smarter, better informed or altruistic voters.

1.Massive investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy, creating hundreds of thousands of tax-generating jobs and addressing the climate crisis.
2. Tax increases for the very wealthy and a crackdown on executive pay, raising bilions and addressing the ever-widening gap between rich and poor.
3. Scrap Trident and I.D. cards scheme, saving yet more billions of waste.

All radical and progressive policies from the Green Party, whilst Labour, Tory and Libdems compete to see which will slash public services the most.

As a Socialist, I could vote for such policies.

Well I'd only go for no. 1 bozo. What I don't get is why the need for cuts in public spending. Where is this money going? Why do we have so much less money to pay for services we've become used to? Where's it all going/ gone?

So Frodo, you see no need to tax the very wealthy more and no need to close the ever-widening gap 'tween rich and poor.
You also want to keep on spending billions on a weapon you hope never to use and millions on an I.D. card system that is unpopular and unproven as a means to an end, whatever that is ( the goalposts keep moving on that ).
As to the need for slashing public services, there is none, save that in the capitalist system, in recession the poor must suffer and the wealthy must be protected.

I'd agree with nr. 1 too, but the the other two I see no valid reason to agree with. Perhaps you can explain these points a little more in depth other than the polemics of your previous post?

(September 22, 2009 at 3:13 am)leo-rcc Wrote: I'd agree with nr. 1 too, but the the other two I see no valid reason to agree with. Perhaps you can explain these points a little more in depth other than the polemics of your previous post?

No further explanation needed. They are perfectly understandable. They are so different from the cuts in expenditure programmes of the 3 main parties. You must see that????You know where I stand from past threads, I'm not going to repeat myself.

(September 21, 2009 at 7:18 pm)bozo Wrote: So Frodo, you see no need to tax the very wealthy more and no need to close the ever-widening gap 'tween rich and poor.

Well that's a natural thing - I have no problem with the percentages game.

(September 21, 2009 at 7:18 pm)bozo Wrote: You also want to keep on spending billions on a weapon you hope never to use

Well same with ALL of the military but consensus doesn't agree with me & I'm happy with that democracy.

(September 21, 2009 at 7:18 pm)bozo Wrote: ..and millions on an I.D. card system that is unpopular and unproven as a means to an end, whatever that is ( the goalposts keep moving on that ).

Personally I WANT the ID system. I'd be happy with chips in our necks.

(September 21, 2009 at 7:18 pm)bozo Wrote: As to the need for slashing public services, there is none, save that in the capitalist system, in recession the poor must suffer and the wealthy must be protected.

IMO the recession is just hype. Over all we seem to need to cut services, and we have during the boom time too, & I'm questioning that. I don't think this is an opportunity to don your flat cap.

So Frodo, back to the subject, which party are you likely to support, if any?

I am left of centre.

(September 23, 2009 at 12:49 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: I am left of centre.

You're avoiding answering! That's your choice.