Smackdown

Graham Richardson pointed to an exchange in the Parliament:

My SkyNews colleague Paul Murray was in Canberra on Monday and was appalled that an MPI (Matter of Public Importance) was moved in the Senate which enabled Labor speakers 13 minutes each to bucket Pauline Hanson, who was then given only two and a half minutes to reply and defend herself. The manifest unfairness of the system was obvious to all, but the result was not what the major parties might have expected. In her short time, Senator Hanson delivered a response far more effective and memorable than all the attacks on her ever could be.

So I went and had a look at the Hansard (as one does):

Senator Hanson: … The fact is, I will not apologise for being a patriotic Australian—for standing up for Australian values and for the Australian people. So you can do your deals with the Greens, and all the rest of it, who want to see Australian coal destroyed, jobs destroyed and opening up for extremists in this country. Do your deals with them—that is absolutely wonderful! That is not what the people want. It was right when Senator Brandis said that 600,000 Australians voted for One Nation at the last election. Are you saying they all got it wrong? I don’t think so.

You should get out your tissues for the tears running down your cheeks, because you have not been able to do preference deals with us. The fact is, you have lost your way in this nation. Whether you have held government in the states or federally you have run this country into the ground. You have gone so socialist with your policies. You have the CFMEU, the unions, running you, so you have no control over your own destiny. People cannot rely on you at all, so don’t talk to me about grubby deals.

I have worked hard and I have put my policies out there to the Australian people who voted for One Nation—not only myself, but two senators in Queensland, one in New South Wales and one in Western Australia. It was based on our policies—what the Australian people want.

The Labor Party has well and truly lost its way. I am not going to stand here and support the Liberal or National parties either, because I think they all have a lot to learn about what grassroots Australians really want. From the very beginning I said that when it came down to doing preferences in Western Australia I was going to do what I thought best for getting One Nation candidates elected to the floor of parliament, and that is exactly what I am doing.

I am not here to prop up the Colin Barnett government, and I am certainly not here to ensure that Mr McGowan is elected into the parliament either. That is a decision for the people. When they go to vote their preferences belong to them. The how-to-vote cards are only a recommendation. They belong to the voter. That is my message to the people. I will put myself out there with my candidates. We will put our policies up and the people will decide.

You waste time in this chamber talking about this when we have over 200,000 homeless. I am fighting for the cane farmers up in Queensland who are about to go under—the cattle producers and everyone. And here you are in this chamber talking about One Nation and the preference deal in Western Australia. That is a state issue. It has nothing to do with matters federally. I really think it is pathetic. You should be absolutely ashamed of yourselves for the people watching this to think that you raised this as an issue. The people of Australia will be watching this and they know that I am out there fighting for them and their issues. If I say anything extreme they will judge me. But it is a shame that you have actually judged me because you are in fear of losing your seats to One Nation. I will put myself up against you any time—the Labor Party, the Liberals, the National Party or the Greens—based on my policies and how I fight for the Australian people.

Pretty impressive. If One Nation can get its organisational capacity up to speed, they could become quite formidable.

Building organisational capacity, however, is not a trivial task or easily done. In the short run I expect to see many “problem” senators and state MPs being elected. At the same time, however, they could do serious damage to the major parties and also sound economic policy.

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

123 Responses to Smackdown

  1. Infidel Tiger

    The Senate today had a couple of great moments from Bernardi and Leyonjhelm and then it descended into madness of Welcome to Country mumbo jumbo and for the last few hours the Greens going ape shit about climate change.

    Quite hilarious to hear the drug addled, mentally weak ludlam label Malcolm Roberts a fringe extremist.

  2. Infidel Tiger

    You should get out your tissues for the tears running down your cheeks, because you have not been able to do preference deals with us. The fact is, you have lost your way in this nation. Whether you have held government in the states or federally you have run this country into the ground. You have gone so socialist with your policies. You have the CFMEU, the unions, running you, so you have no control over your own destiny. People cannot rely on you at all, so don’t talk to me about grubby deals.

    Great stuff. We just need to get rid of Pauline’s socialist policies and things will be sweet.

  3. candy

    One Nation are anti-vax. It’s dangerous policy, no scientific basis.
    For that reason, it’s hard to vote for them, for me personally.

    I admire Pauline Hanson and One Nation’s independence, but I think a coalition with the Libs is troublesome, with the Libs scraping off the Nationals.

    As Tony Abbott said, it is better to stick to your mates, you will need them in the future.

  4. A Lurker

    Latest Essential poll for Federal primary votes- One Nation is now polling at 10%, Greens at 9%.

    Expect that One Nation vote to enlarge.

  5. Entropy

    Their tax policy is absolutely destructive of the Australian way of life. On s very shallow glance you go “interesting”. Then you work out how it would operate and his business would adjust, and everything becomes vertically integrated and imported.

  6. candy

    Their tax policy is absolutely destructive of the Australian way of life.

    2% tax on everyone. It tries to appeal to the simplest ideas. Why the Libs thinks this will be a good coalition, with ON instead of the Nats, is worrisome.

  7. Nerblnob

    Seems quite articulate in print. Is that verbatim? If so, more concise than any of the other parties’ waffle.

    Maybe it’s her accent they don’t like. I.e snobbery.

    ON has stupid policies – protectionism and anti-vax already cited – but so do LibLabGreen.

    Anti-vax is neither here nor there. Just something Greens, fracktivists, coal-haters etc can point to to divert from their equally hysterical anti-science nonsense. Except that most people, left to themselves are happy to get their kids vaccinated anyway.

  8. RobK

    The policies need work but the rejoinder from Hanson was comprehensive and pretty complete, especially highlighting the wasteful ad hominem and irrelevance. Work still required but streets ahead of the Greens.

  9. Anton

    Why are ON economic policies regarded as bad?

    Is this compared to anything offered by the Libs, Nats, Labor or Greens, or some utopian ideal discussed in the post-grad coffee lounge (works for perfect spheres in a vacuum)?

    Free trade deals do not approximate free markets at all. White guilt drives deals where Australia drops tariffs on manufactured goods while maintaining the high regulatory burden on local suppliers, while the foreign counterpart agrees to buy our globally traded, auction priced commodities at a discount. The only thing we export more of turns out to be jobs.

    How do ON policies compare to the others on:
    >Climate change
    >Family law
    >Immigration

    It is also true that ON has 100% of the engineers elected to parliament. Prefer lawyers?

  10. Entropy

    A ton, economic policy changes should compare with what we got now. Crappy now sure, saggy, flaccid, like bob hawke’s dick, but would the proposed change be better or worse?
    A 2% transaction is tax to replace a heap of others sounds great until you think about it. In a productvspuuly chain, that two oerecent gets added into the sale price. Each time. A complex supply chain with many small businesses along it would be severely disadvantaged compared with a vertically integrated business with few transactions. The result favours big business against the little guy.
    Similarly, rather than make a product locally and incur multiple instances of the tax every time you buy an input, just import the finished product and incur the tax once.

    You would have to agree that is pretty bad,

  11. Joe

    Similarly, rather than make a product locally and incur multiple instances of the tax every time you buy an input, just import the finished product and incur the tax once.

    You would have to agree that is pretty bad,

    As opposed to what’s happening now? No difference. We still import stuff that used to be manufactured locally. So that’s no argument against it. It does have the advantage of breadth and will pickup all manner of currently tax free transactions.

  12. GoTiges

    At the same time, however, they could do serious damage to the major parties and also sound economic policy.

    Agree on the first point. Not so sure about the second. It pre-supposes we have sound economic policy now or is in prospect. Can’t think of any off the top of my head.

  13. Anton

    You would have to agree that is pretty bad

    Agreed, a value added version would be better. But compare to what we have now:
    30% of profits plus 10% of any value created.
    Quite a lot of 2% increments to equal that.

    Actually, business taxes are just hidden taxes on natural people because they all get transferred. Ignoring relative bargaining power, taxes on profits transfer to shareholders, payroll taxes go to employees and sales taxes go to customers. A business is just a distribution centre for cash flows.

    An honest approach would be to not tax businesses at all and tax the target demographic directly.

  14. Jannie

    Many of her policies seem a bit loopy, and her economic thinking is a bit flat earth. But that doesn’t matter.

    The crisis in the West and Australia is only partly economic, so far anyway. The crisis is about the collapse of western culture and civilisation in the face of external islamic invasion and internal leftist sabotage. If we can’t save our culture the economy doesn’t matter anyway.

  15. Hydra

    Geezus christ she is brilliant.

    The transaction tax is terrible but I see Hanson as someone whose policies can change if argued with evidence rather than rhetoric, especially when those policies are economic. There are many other alternatives which I think Hanson would like that she could be convinced of.

    Being pro-choice of vaccinations is not anti-vax and besides i highly doubt she would vow to change any such laws because it would be political suicide.

  16. NewChum

    At the same time, however, they could do serious damage to the major parties and also sound economic policy.

    Bipartisan policy between lab lib is for some type of glorious RET. Textbook fruit loop policy – destructive, difficult to unwind, worse over time and utterly, utterly pointless.

    One nation policies mixing up the tax system? Second order issue compared to keeping the freaking lights on.

    Most people don’t care anymore. They see in One Nation a battering ram to smash things up, so they’ll get behind and give it a push. Stop Muslim immigration? Stop renewables idiocy? Why wouldn’t people sign up? Who wants to live in the dark waiting for a criminal gang to smash down the door and steal your stuff?

  17. BorisG

    Being pro-choice of vaccinations is not anti-vax and besides i highly doubt she would vow to change any such laws because it would be political suicide.

    perhaps but it is an indicator that she can advocate crackpot views.

  18. BorisG

    They see in One Nation a battering ram to smash things up

    are you suggested that Australians have nothing to lose? be careful what you wish for.

  19. Anton

    The arguments against PHON sound a bit like the LDP on economic policy:

    If we can’t have their “perfect” solution (however impractical) we will stick to what we have. No incremental improvement will be tolerated

  20. Robber Baron

    A political lightweight like Hanson is exposing just how pathetic Turnbull and Shorten are. Regardless of how terrible Abbott was as a PM, he would have had Hanson for breakfast. Each day that Turnbull is PM, the more Pauline grows in stature. Remarkable, absolutely remarkable.

  21. Anton

    BorisG
    perhaps but it is an indicator that she can advocate crackpot views

    So better to stick with Lib/Lab because of their better vaccination policies?
    Or perhaps stick with one of the micro parties that are unlikely to ever win a single seat?

  22. BorisG

    The arguments against PHON sound a bit like the LDP on economic policy:

    The difference is that LDP wants to take us in the right direction. I will vote for them.

  23. OneWorldGovernment

    What I would like to ask, and propose, what if we did nothing about Global Warming.

    What if we said yes you have a good argument but so what?

    When has the Earth environment been any different?

    Why not do nothing except continue on the path we have evolved over 100’s of years to utilise fossil fuels?

    After all, if agw doesn’t kill us then something else will so what is the point?

  24. I am the Walras, Equilibrate, and Price-Take

    I’m indifferent to One Nation generally. But if they are going to destroy the Liberal Party, skewer the climate change nutcases, and send the sand-conquistadors back to the shitholes that they come from, then I am pleased.

  25. A Lurker

    The crisis in the West and Australia is only partly economic, so far anyway. The crisis is about the collapse of western culture and civilisation in the face of external islamic invasion and internal leftist sabotage. If we can’t save our culture the economy doesn’t matter anyway.

    Bingo!
    Economy is downstream from culture.
    Fix the culture and you fix the economy.

  26. I am the Walras, Equilibrate, and Price-Take

    And if you think what I wrote above means that I have been driven far, far beyond anger by the wall-to-wall barking insanity that leftism projectile-vomits every second over me, my family and my beautiful country, you are correct.

  27. incoherent rambler

    candy #2296583, posted on February 14, 2017 at 10:06 pm
    One Nation are anti-vax. It’s dangerous policy, no scientific basis.
    For that reason, it’s hard to vote for them, for me personally.

    I think they can afford not to have your vote (with a few other matured voters). There is a large block of un-vaccinated 30+ who will take up the voting slack.
    Leaving it to an individual to decide is another vote farming policy. (Some would say populist)

  28. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    The transaction tax is terrible but I see Hanson as someone whose policies can change if argued with evidence rather than rhetoric, especially when those policies are economic. There are many other alternatives which I think Hanson would like that she could be convinced of.

    More people in politics should start talking to her. Give her simple two-by-two tables and checklists regarding outcomes of certain policies, keeping it uncomplicated but showing the effects. Maybe Sinc could invite her to do an Op Ed on the Cat and she could get some economic feedback (kept respectful; she’s had enough abuse).

  29. Phil

    When the party with the 2% cascading tax is the only one articulating a coherent view in Parliament I think it’s game over for our political system. I assume people like my kids will end up emigrating a dysfunctional Australia with 70% income tax rates and a worthless currency.

  30. Entropy

    BorisG
    #2296768, posted on February 15, 2017 at 1:13 am
    They see in One Nation a battering ram to smash things up

    are you suggested that Australians have nothing to lose? be careful what you wish for.

    I think it is exactly that. For a lot of one nation voters, life is a shit struggle. They see slimy main chancers and technocrats becoming filthy rich on a taxpayer sourced income, while they themselves labour away at a life always on the edge of failure. Sure PHON economic polices are crap. But so what? Their lives would not change a bit if they didn’t work: crap now, crap later, what’s the diff? And if those crap policies happened to give those snotty bastards in the city with their over inflated vanity telling them how to live a taste of reality, so be it.

  31. Entropy

    Anton
    #2296812, posted on February 15, 2017 at 2:16 am
    The arguments against PHON sound a bit like the LDP on economic policy:

    If we can’t have their “perfect” solution (however impractical) we will stick to what we have. No incremental improvement will be tolerated

    Well PHON could actually think through their tax policy and replace it with something workable that raises sufficient tax to fund what PHON wants to do and doesn’t radically distort business structures in favour of corporations. Ditch the transaction tax, and before announcing a replacement spend five minutes thinking through how the proposed change in tax arrangements would influence behaviour and business structures, and whether those changes are what you want.

  32. Entropy

    An honest approach would be to not tax businesses at all and tax the target demographic directly.

    I agree. Why tax business at all? That might even make the place a desirable place to invest. Some people argue that royalties should also be ditched, but I think not. And you have to think carefully about the alternative revenue, or how government can be shrunk to match revenue.

  33. sabena

    We may well get to a point where One Nation is considered by many voters to be the least worst option.

  34. Tel

    Why tax business at all?

    Have a chat to Willie Sutton about that.

  35. A Lurker

    We may well get to a point where One Nation is considered by many voters to be the least worst option.

    I’m pretty much at that point right now (although I’d put Australian Conservatives or ALA higher on my ballot if they ever field a candidate in my electorate).

    Pauline (unlike the majority of our politicians) I believe means well, and sincerely wants the best for Australia and Australians. However, she needs better economic advice than she is currently receiving, so I like Lizzie’s idea at 6.37am.

    Get Sinc to contact Pauline and ask her to write a guest post for the Cat, and then we all can critique it with considered comments.

  36. B Shaw

    An invitation to do an Op-Ed on Catallaxy.
    That’s a terrific suggestion of Lizzie’s.
    It’s right – more people in politics should be talking to Ms Hanson.

  37. jupes

    How do ON policies compare to the others on:
    >Climate change
    >Family law
    >Immigration

    Exactly.

    Immigration is the most important issue facing the Western world right now and ON has the best policy in the Australian Parliament. The economy is second and ON’s climate change policy would simultaneously save billions and boost industry. They are the most sensible party in Parliament.

  38. jupes

    The difference is that LDP wants to take us in the right direction.

    The LDP are open-borders loons.

    The direction they are taking us is straight to the Caliphate.

  39. cynical1

    The Samson option?

    It’s a small change to the Hanson option.

    And the temple is looking rather grotty…

  40. Dan

    I’m happy to hear from anyone including Pauline. But don’t forget the reason we are even discussing her economic policies is that there isn’t a centre or centre-rightor liberal party with trqction that can advocate for low taxes and generally sensible policies. Yes I hope the LDP can do it but it looks pretty grim.

  41. Dan

    The Samson option?

    It’s a small change to the Hanson option.

    And the temple is looking rather grotty…

    Or just make aliyah (to Singapore or the US) if you want to get all biblical.

  42. Dorothy

    Candy you have just posted comments that I have posted on the Andrew Bolt blog, I also addded that she is also anti coal seam gas, not to mention her crazy family court ideas. Several times I have posted these comments and they don’t pass the moderators

  43. Jessie

    Where is One Nation’s Policy on anti-vaccination?

    Not here

    Nor listed here Under No Jab/No Pay ……….

    Basis of Tax Policy here ………………. read Hansard and the books ……………

  44. dweezy2176

    Candy you have just posted comments that I have posted on the Andrew Bolt blog, I also addded that she is also anti coal seam gas, not to mention her crazy family court ideas. Several times I have posted these comments and they don’t pass the moderators

    Bolt has become irrelevant .. nowadays (since the “upgrade” site) I think you have to be on a “privileged” list to get even the most innocuous comment past his “moderators” .. not worth visiting, anymore!

  45. Jessie

    Agenda 21 – United Nations Environmental Program

    Many local and regional Councils across Australia have signed up AND pay for this.

    The ‘new’ Empowered Communities model touted by the Redfern document and now Turnbull is much the same model as Agenda 21-UNEP.

    How do individuals and families survive under tyrants, elders and tribal leaders seeking total collectivisation?

    As a commentator noted ?14/2/2017, slavery is ore precious than gold (or land and potential resources under native title).

  46. B Shaw

    Pauline Hanson sure has experienced vicious treatment by our media and many others.
    First-time-round PH was frightening the vacuous panel-show blabberers – “she’s soooo dangerous”.
    Feminists whined about her awful make-up; her ghastly voice.
    Off to gaol, Ms Hanson! Mr. Abbott wrote in his book that she went to gaol for a brief three months and then gained much sympathy; so it’s okay.
    Turnbull had the hide to state that she didn’t belong in Parliament.

    More people in politics should be talking to her.

  47. Viva

    How does Pauline compare with Marine le Pen I wonder?

  48. KaaBee

    I fully agree dweezy2176, Bolts’s site has lost its edge of recent times.

  49. Simon/Other

    Those unreliable senators are also the strong point of the party. They may sound like idiots but they look determined. That strength of vision, puerile or not, is what is hooking voters. If either of the big two had any of it One Nation wouldn’t be getting a look in. Never underestimate the potency of certainty in troubling times.

  50. Jonesy

    Pauline needs to get a means of vetting who gets preselection or positions within administration. She tends to be a lightning rod attracting ratbags with ratbag views and comments. However, on the floor of the Senate, she no longer is afraid of articulating her views. She dropped the ALP in their own excrement by naming the Qld state sec and his grubby deal for ON to run dead in ALP electorates. Too clever by half is the major parties. They thought Pauline would be too stunned to even reply against their withering collective attack….2.5 minutes is more than enough time to cut the collective a new one.

  51. B Shaw

    9:04 Yes, that’s true. Ms Hanson does need to get a means of vetting who gets preselection or positions within administration. In our household, I hear this over and over again.

  52. NewChum

    It dawned on me that the reason for the One Nation vilification is not to scare off voters – the privacy of the voting booth is where the voters will have their say.

    No, the vilification is to try and prevent talented people from joining the party as candidates or advisers.

    The economic policies are t that important as One Nation will end up in coalition. But if they can bring real change to immigration policy and global warming lunacy there is hope for at least some change in direction.

    Imagine a DD election campaigned on the issue of destroying the RET. Dare to dream.

  53. Anton

    BorisG

    How does the LDP take us in the right direction?
    Their economic policies are so extreme that unless the LDP achieve an absolute majority in both houses they will never be implemented.

    One has to wonder if that is actually the intent. Rely on economic policies that will never be implemented to cover for their positions on open borders and gay marriage

  54. Anton

    Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.
    Give her simple two-by-two tables and checklists regarding outcomes of certain policies

    But not for the sensible members from the Liberals, Labor, Nationals, Greens and miscellaneous independents?

  55. stackja

    Voters will decide. The next elections will decide how people view PHON.

  56. Tim Neilson

    We still import stuff that used to be manufactured locally. So that’s no argument against it.
    Joe, if a bloke is having difficulty picking up chicks, the solution isn’t to cut off his own dick. Don’t make things worse.

    It does have the advantage of breadth and will pickup all manner of currently tax free transactions.

    Some of us don’t see tax increases as inherently a good thing.

  57. B Shaw

    ” . . but not for the sensible members . . . . ? ”

    Ah yes

  58. Roger

    Economy is downstream from culture. Fix the culture and you fix the economy.

    And culture is downstream from cult: cult –> culture.

    That is to say that religion – or the lack of it – shapes the culture.

    We need to get back to first principles.

    Without that we’ll only become a more decadent society, no matter what happens to the economy.

  59. Anton

    Dorothy

    What crazy family court ideas?

  60. A Lurker

    But not for the sensible members from the Liberals, Labor, Nationals, Greens and miscellaneous independents?

    Not many sensible politicians out there, the majority’s minds are closed, however, I suspect Pauline is open to worthwhile ideas if the benefits are spelled out clearly to her.

  61. cohenite

    candy

    #2296583, posted on February 14, 2017 at 10:06 pm

    One Nation are anti-vax. It’s dangerous policy, no scientific basis.
    For that reason, it’s hard to vote for them, for me personally.

    Show me where PHON says that in their policies.

  62. Diogenes

    What crazy family court ideas?

    Mandatory pre-nups. The idea is you sort out the split details while everybody is still lovey dovey, and it becomes a simple matter of judge reading, ensuring it meets guidelines and accepting. Then when the shit hits the fan, everything is on auto pilot, and a lot of the very bitter FC fights are avoided. A lot of Cats on an older OT said – stupid because today prenups are easily voided – complete with anecdotes!

    However if they are court approved with a very very limited set of reasons to allow them to be overturned, then they would require real evidence. The one fly in the ointment is the ‘weaponisation’ of domestic violence by women.

  63. John Michelmore

    Frankly recent governments have little idea about running the sovereign country Australia for Australians. These so called political elites in many respects ignore the natural advantages we have as a nation. A few examples:-
    1) We have the biggest uranium reserves in the world ,and yet we use none of it, surely we should use nuclear power to replace our carbon intensive coal and gas if we stupidly believe in controlling the climate.
    2) We have massive coal reserves, but it is better to export it and close our own coal fired power generation without having sufficient base load power to replace coal fired generation.
    3) We might have petroleum oil reserves, but its better not to know this and import our fuels and have a a 13 day diesel stock level. Goodness, any hiccough in shipping and everything stops in 13 days.
    What we have in Australia for government is absolute incompetence, at this point I have no hesitation supporting Pauline, voting for more of the same is suicidal.

  64. Roger

    any hiccough in shipping and everything stops in 13 days.

    A point I also have made here, John.

    Our security assessment of our fuel reserves appears to be based on the most optimistic view possible of the threat to the shipping lanes we rely on for our imports. Heaven forbid that a regional conflict should break out involving China or that China should succeed in pushing the US naval presence back to Hawaii, as is their goal..

  65. .

    Anton
    #2297017, posted on February 15, 2017 at 9:30 am
    BorisG

    How does the LDP take us in the right direction?
    Their economic policies are so extreme that unless the LDP achieve an absolute majority in both houses they will never be implemented.

    “Extreme”!

    You’re a fucking communist.

  66. Anton

    Mandatory pre-nups would be a good idea and make the family breakup and childcare outcomes better for children.

    Currently it is all “make it up as you go along”. I was dragged through the family courts 7 times, and despite have the wrong equipment in my underwear won on each occasion. Eventually I won court orders in my favour, but our 97% diverse Child Support Agency just decided to ignore them. Their response to me “you can take us to the Supreme Court” – beyond the capacity of someone who has to work for a living.

    Pre-nups would also be easy to implement. “Standard” contracts could be available to couples not interested in the process, and churches could also provide contracts acceptable to their belief set.

    Pre-nup contracts were very common in the colonies of the British empire, at a time when liberty was still a popular concept in Western politics.

  67. Anton

    hey ., thanks for responding.

    BTW, were you intending to provide an argument?

  68. .

    Anyone who thinks letting workers keep more of their income is at best a socialist.

    The current policy regime we have is socialist, we should never let socialists dictate terms.

    The LDP’s tax policy is fair and economically responsible.

    So far, not other political party has a tax plan that does that in Australia.

    The rest is socialist garbage that is unreconstructed government greed and punishes hard work.

    It is truly communist propaganda to characterise a tax policy that encourages savings and private enterprise as “extreme”.

    If the Liberal party have moved so far to the left, point it out. There is nothing “extreme” about the LDP at all.

  69. .

    Anton
    #2297107, posted on February 15, 2017 at 10:39 am
    hey ., thanks for responding.

    BTW, were you intending to provide an argument?

    Where’s your argument BTW? You are rambling on like a NXT candidate.

  70. Thomas

    Happenings like this ‘unfair’ treatment of Senator Hanson is exactly the motivation for ‘grassroots’ voters to move away from ‘party chosen’ candidates and to real candidates that speak their mind. See Trump, Farrage and others. While her views may not capture this nation of political sheep, it may well capture those that are (or think they are) sheepdogs. The major parties enjoy being insulated from the populace by the media (admittedly more the Labour Party and Greens), but shenanigans like this will (hopefully) start to erode that insulation and provide candidates that we as Australians are happy to vote for.

  71. Candy

    Pauline Hanson is on record as saying she is anti vax and would not get her own kids done now. Perhaps she thought she was riding some populist thoughts with that or something but did not want it definitely as a policy on their website
    The federal govt banned an anti vax speaker from speaking here about a year or so ago. At odds with Ms Hanson’s views.

  72. Anton

    Candy

    The federal govt banned an anti vax speaker from speaking here about a year or so ago. At odds with Ms Hanson’s views.

    Free speech is unimportant when it goes against your preferred ideology?

  73. Roger

    The tin eared stupidity of the Labor Party is a wonderful thing.

    Lining up to have a go at Hanson is like sledging Virat Kohli.

  74. Derp

    They’re still honey to the loonies and conspiracy minded
    Extreme vetting is a great idea, when do they get some?

  75. Anton

    .

    How much progress has the LDP senator achieved towards the elusive libertarian utopia?

    I know the LDP have published some academic hallucinations as an alternative economic and tax policy, but how many have actually been taken seriously by anyone else? How many economically beneficial deals has the LDP senator actually achieved? I mean actual achievements.

    And while their economic thought bubbles go exactly nowhere, their support of unlimited Islamic immigration and imposition of gay marriage are the only notable areas of progress

  76. struth

    I always scratch my head at people who will find the odd policy quirk a reason not to vote for politicians who are anti muslim immigration, anti open borders, when the alternative are nothing short of traitors actively working to bring down the nation state of Australia.
    Sit in your kitchen, dare not leave the house uncovered listening to some dick wailing five times a day into a loud speaker across your violence ravaged muslim hell hole of Australistan, secure in the knowledge you didn’t vote for vaccinations you now can’t get anyway.

  77. Barry 1963

    Many see her as an authentic voice, but to me, she’s another politician. I wonder, between her stint in the house of reps in the 1990s till now, what was her source of income? I don’t think she went back to the fish and chip shop, and I can’t see that she had a job or other business. How did she support herself. She’d be authentic to me if she explained.

  78. .

    Anton – why are you running interference for socialism and high taxes?

    I know the LDP have published some academic hallucinations as an alternative economic and tax policy, but how many have actually been taken seriously by anyone else? How many economically beneficial deals has the LDP senator actually achieved? I mean actual achievements.

    What a load of trolling wank.

    The policies might get taken up by Bernardi. They haven’t been taken up by the Liberals because the Liberals are a joke. Hanson is a socialist so she would never take them on.

    How many economically beneficial deals has the LDP senator actually achieved?

    Well, PHON and the Liberals have not done this in the last 45+ years.

    Leyonhjelm has blocked a few tax increases.

  79. B Shaw

    Ms Hanson didn’t “go back to the fish and chip shop”, Barry?
    Did you want her to?

  80. Cassie of Sydney

    “I fully agree dweezy2176, Bolts’s site has lost its edge of recent times”. Too right, however I would go further and argue that Bolt himself has lost the edge of recent times, or rather “Bolt has lost any sense of recent times”. His blog attack on Pickering and Cameron was sanctimonious, pompous and completely at odds with any belief in free speech. He just bought into the whole “gays and Muslims are always victims” Me thinks that Andrew Bolt is taking himself a trifle too seriously.

  81. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    But not for the sensible members from the Liberals, Labor, Nationals, Greens and miscellaneous independents?

    Yes, for them too. In fact, it’s already been done for most of them for a long time and in as much detail as their various intellects can manage. The thing about doing it for Hanson is she is at the beginning of a learning curve and still open to sensible ideas that are presented for easy comprehension without the academic economic baggage carried by the major parties. I don’t downplay Hanson’s capacity to develop some good economic understandings; she’s demonstrated so far that she has a good ability to listen, take in information, and act on it according to her core beliefs. One’s accent is not one’s intellect.

    We should help her.

  82. Joe

    RE: Vaccines

    The latest study “Combining Childhood Vaccines at One Visit Is Not Safe” shows that it is not the vaccines that are the problem. The administration of multiple vaccines simultaneously is the problem. It shows that children inoculated with separate vaccines halve less of a chance of experiencing adverse reactions to those inoculated simultaneously.

  83. gabrianga

    Am sure Graham also denied giving” infectious blankets” to anyone?

    Another blow to “Dreamtime Bill” ?

  84. Anton

    Thanks .

    The policies might get taken up by Bernardi.
    Has he said so? Has he offered to join the LDP?
    Then perhaps the LDP policies may also be taken up by the Greens? They already share common ground on Muslim immigration and gay marriage.

    They haven’t been taken up by the Liberals because the Liberals are a joke.
    You forgot to mention they are communist. Everyone not supporting the LDP is a communist.
    As a side note: LDP policies have not been taken up by the voting public either. Communists?

    Hanson is a socialist so she would never take them on.
    Perhaps PHON still clings to the antiquated idea that they need policies supported by the voting public.

    Leyonhjelm has blocked a few tax increases
    We really loved the way he stalled the repeal of the mining and carbon taxes during the Abbott government.

  85. Dorothy

    Anton and Coenite Pauline Hanson admitted these things to Andrew Bolt
    As for her family court ideas it’s on her web site and I have heard her several times on Sky on this subject

  86. jupes

    There is nothing “extreme” about the LDP at all.

    Well … except that they are open-borders loons. There’s that.

  87. DrBeauGan

    Yes, offer Pauline Hanson a soap box, Sinc. She might not take it up, and the responses might not impress her, but we owe it to her and ourselves to give her a fair hearing.

  88. Combine Dave

    Free trade deals do not approximate free markets at all. White guilt drives deals where Australia drops tariffs on manufactured goods while maintaining the high regulatory burden on local suppliers, while the foreign counterpart agrees to buy our globally traded, auction priced commodities at a discount. The only thing we export more of turns out to be jobs.

    Instead of bashing our more competitive foreigner suppliers why not fix the bolded bit above?

    That’s the best way to create more jobs here in Aus.

  89. Pat Warnock

    She must winnow out nuts and weirdos.

  90. Jo Smyth

    Shorten and Turnbull are the best adverts for the rise of One Nation so as long as they stick around, Pauline is on a winner.

  91. cohenite

    Dorothy

    #2297289, posted on February 15, 2017 at 1:19 pm

    Anton and Coenite Pauline Hanson admitted these things to Andrew Bolt

    Yaaas, the lady has expressed some scepticism of vaccination, which I don’t like; but where is it in her policies?

  92. struth

    on manufactured goods while maintaining the high regulatory burden on local suppliers

    Amazing isn’t it?
    Trump is going to tax less and take away the regulatory burden on American business and the left call it protectionism.

    It’s like a boxer having his hands tied for years, being battered about the ring like Rock Hudson, by a socialist midget with a rifle butt, able to finally get his hands free to defend himself.
    If that boxer is a white westerner, that is called protectionism to lefties.

  93. PrettyPowerful

    Good work Pauline.

    “Many of her policies seem a bit loopy, and her economic thinking is a bit flat earth.”

    If that is the best your opponents can do then i think you are way in front.

  94. Anton

    Dorothy

    I know the PHON family court policies are on the website. What is wrong with them?

  95. Anton

    Combine Dave

    Instead of bashing our more competitive foreigner suppliers why not fix the bolded bit above

    Agreed. But is it sensible to enter the lopsided trade deals before we do so? Can we put the newly unemployed workers into sleep mode while we rebuild an economy, or do they need to pay for food and housing while we do so?

  96. .

    I won’t be spoken down to by socialist loons.

  97. Lizzie;
    .

    Maybe Sinc could invite her to do an Op Ed on the Cat and she could get some economic feedback (kept respectful; she’s had enough abuse).

    Fair enough, how about it, Doomlord?

  98. Anton

    .
    I won’t be spoken down to by socialist loons.

    I thought I was a communist.
    Anyway, thanks for the insightful argument. Good to see you have remained consistent in the quality of thoughts presented here

  99. .

    I’ve always been nice to Pauline. Reading some trolling PHON dickhead reckon that Leyonhjelm delayed tax cuts is really odious bullshit. Like how some IDIOT LNP supporters still contend “Abbott did the right thing” by railroading her. Despicable!

    Pauline HAS moved in the right direction. Last year when her, Kiralee Smith and DL were on the GC with PML (with that poor GLT/NXT women with NFI), she had expressed anti tax and smaller government sentiments.

  100. .

    Anton
    #2297557, posted on February 15, 2017 at 4:50 pm
    .
    I won’t be spoken down to by socialist loons.

    I thought I was a communist.
    Anyway, thanks for the insightful argument. Good to see you have remained consistent in the quality of thoughts presented here

    You have presented nothing you idiot.

    1. You lied about DL’s Parliamentary record.
    2. You’ve conflated open borders with anything which isn’t a moratorium on immigration.
    3. You have constantly run interference for higher taxes and socialism – calling laisseiz faire/letting workers keep more of their pay “extreme”.

    You are a socialist loon. You probably do wish for communism.

  101. Anton

    . has spoken!

    Serious question: If a worker’s job is exported, how much of their income do they keep?

    Ans: 100%, of nothing

    Anyway, it was you who said (10:43):
    Anyone who thinks letting workers keep more of their income is at best a socialist

  102. Tator

    Anton,
    my wife is now 10 years out from leaving the Family Court and it was so dysfunctional with its administration let alone with the judiciary who half of which were off with the fairies most of the time. One who is now retired used to fall asleep at the bench most days.
    The entire FCA needs to be reformed as it was 10 years ago, it had an institutionalised attitude that it was a court for families with all the warm and fuzzy crap and not a court of law to deal with family issues. It rarely enforced its own orders and as far as I know, no-one bar the AFP can enforce their orders as legislation bars the state police services from actively policing FCA orders. We used to turn up, find that an order is being contravened and could do nothing about it except advise see your lawyer first thing next business day and lodge a breach with the court.
    What needs to be done is to scrap it totally and start from scratch with policies that ensure compliance with orders, rules of evidence are followed and total impartiality.
    One of the major issues is the double dipping into the husbands finances when there are children involved. Firstly the wife gets the majority of the assets and then gets a fair chunk of hubbies income on top of that, obviously some feminist wrote that policy, I want to see gay marriage go ahead just to see the lefties on the benches heads explode when dealing with a lesbian couples case with major childrens issues etc ( just kidding, have seen the results of this already with a gay couple who I was friends with split up and they had 2 kids) It was fun watching the lawyers and justice scratching their heads as they worked out the details as it was totally foreign to them having to treat both parties equally rather than the usual 2 thirds to mum and kids every 2nd weekend for dad along with a massive child support bill.
    Maybe a reform of the CSA is in order as well, now that I have finished with them so a more equitable system can be set up so fathers who are having their contact illegally restricted by ex partners can have child support relief. It is a bugger of a system and even worse to go through for 18 years or more.

  103. King Koala

    perhaps but it is an indicator that she can advocate crackpot views

    So you are against informed consent to medical procedures….wow

    What other crackpot views do you believe the government should ride roughshod over? Man made climate change skepticism is another crackpot theory according to the msm. Not eating grains is a crackpot theory. Would you also support the forced feeding of bread and processed carbs to kids? Or just to attend school?

    Its amazing how you ‘libertarians’ are for freedom when it involves screwing over the working class economically but the minute someone uses that freedom in a way you don’t like they are crackpots

  104. Habib

    I’m surprised that in 2 1/2 minutes she could be coherent. The majors are appalling swine, however if Hanson is the answer we’re more rooted than a thirty year old carrot.

  105. Jessie

    Joe #2297235, posted on February 15, 2017 at 12:23 pm
    RE: Vaccines

    The latest study “Combining Childhood Vaccines at One Visit Is Not Safe” shows that it is not the vaccines that are the problem. The administration of multiple vaccines simultaneously is the problem. It shows that children inoculated with separate vaccines halve less of a chance of experiencing adverse reactions to those inoculated simultaneously.

    Thanks for this link, interesting.
    He did have some good points among the selected studies presented. I haven’t gone back and checked his references and whether they correspond to text quotes/points of argument.

    At the end of his article:
    NZ Miller is a medical research journalist
    Conflicts of Interest: No conflicts of interest were disclosed

    A very very quick search of google Encyclopedia of American Loons

    Biography

    The US Loon site is entertaining reading in itself.

  106. Combine Dave

    Agreed. But is it sensible to enter the lopsided trade deals before we do so? Can we put the newly unemployed workers into sleep mode while we rebuild an economy, or do they need to pay for food and housing while we do so?
    .

    I’m sure the Church can step in to help those in need.

  107. .

    Serious question: If a worker’s job is exported, how much of their income do they keep?

    Why don’t you ask yourself crackpot, how many real jobs are sacrificed to keep someone in a subsidised “job”.

    You utter pillock.

  108. .

    Its amazing how you ‘libertarians’ are for freedom when it involves screwing over the working class economically but the minute someone uses that freedom in a way you don’t like they are crackpots

    Another crackpot wants to put many more out of work so a select few can make cars no one wants to buy, overpriced sugar and clothes no one wants to buy.

  109. Anton

    FFS .
    Forget GDP, at least as we calculate it in Australia. Hopefully we can agree that GDP is a bullshit statistic. Those retail workers, baristas, hairdressers, teachers and bartenders are not going to generate the export earnings required to pay for the goods Australia needs to import.

    Some Australian workers are overpaid, but a lot of the inefficiencies in the economy are imposed by government. These will not magically vanish once protective barriers are removed. So instead of making Australian industry more efficient, it will become extinct. The regulatory burden must be removed first, then protections can be removed. Order is important. There is no point in targeting an optimal point if you can’t plot a feasible path to get there.

    If you (LDP) think sacrificing breadwinner jobs is a worthwhile cost for achieving “efficient markets” we know why your policies will never get accepted by the electorate. Winning elections is a prerequisite for imposing your ideology on a society. There is that “feasible path” thing again

  110. .

    Breadwinner jobs!

    You idiot.

    You want to put MORE people out of work to keep LESS people in jobs they think they “own”.

    Those retail workers, baristas, hairdressers, teachers and bartenders are not going to generate the export earnings required to pay for the goods Australia needs to import.

    We don’t “need” to export to purchase imports. You need high productivity. Which you don’t get from subsidising people into fake “jobs” that put MORE people out of work than they “employ”.

  111. Anton

    Tator – did you/your wife work in the FC, or are you talking about your 10 year legal battles in the court?

    Ultimately the problem is that the various family and childcare laws were written with the intention of breaking down families. The phrase “for the good of the child” is used liberally in the legislation, but in reality children are only pawns used to maximise conflict. The family court appears to not regard legislation or evidence as very important, and never punishes “frivolous or vexatious” claimants at all. In practice it is a free lottery for any aggrieved party.

    The CSA is much worse. They really consider themselves above the law and have amassed powers the ATO does not even have. They are the most gender diverse government department, being 97% female (almost 100% diversity achieved) and blatantly man hating. They will always inflame any minor situation to the maximum conflict level possible and always take sides. They act with impunity because ultimately only the supreme court can stop them – out of reach for most ordinary people.

    My ordeal is thankfully over, and my children are healing slowly. But I will never forgive the damage this despicable government department has wilfully done to my children.

  112. Anton

    We don’t “need” to export to purchase imports

    As I am an idiot I can’t understand this statement. How many cups of coffee do we need to carry (productively of course) to pay for an imported iPhone?

  113. .

    The trade deficit doesn’t matter. It never mattered. It only ever mattered to central bankers who were accounting for gold specie flow in the first instance.

    The quantities and prices don’t matter, except to the buyer and seller.

    All that matters is that you have productivity. Imposing low productivity on jobs at the cost of real, more productive jobs just so you can export is wildly silly, moreso when the protected industries in Australia exported very little anyway.

    Exports help to buy imports if you get a good price. Then the currency can appreciate – like iron ore has done lately.

    Foreigners buy iron ore, they don’t buy Holden Camiras, Australian sugar or Dunlop K26s.

    If you are productive enough you can buy whatever you like. It doesn’t matter if you don’t export. The CAD always, ALWAYS equals the KA surplus.

  114. Anton

    If you are productive enough you can buy whatever you like. It doesn’t matter if you don’t export

    Wow. Can I apply this to my household?
    I don’t need to go to work (export my labour), if I am really productive in mowing my lawn, washing the car and cleaning the pool I can buy anything I want! Amazing

    just put it on the credit card.
    The LDP should get on just fine with the Greens, total policy overlap

  115. The CAD always, ALWAYS equals the KA surplus.

    English?

  116. .

    You sort of understand this, but you have the application arse backwards.

    What applies to your household, doesn’t necessarily apply to a country.

    I don’t need to go to work (export my labour), if I am really productive in mowing my lawn, washing the car and cleaning the pool I can buy anything I want! Amazing

    That’s not productivity. That’s consumption. No one cares.

    If Australia’s GDP doubled tomorrow and we stopped exporting – why couldn’t we import whatever we could afford? There is no reason at all why we couldn’t.

    Australians trade with each other. Australians trade with foreigners.

    “Australia” is just an aggregation. “Australia” doesn’t buy x quantity of tomatoes from OS when they are out of season. A few firms do this and sell them to Australians on basically what is an open market.

    You don’t understand trade balances. They are not borrowing. Likewise, a trade surplus is not “savings”.

    If you buy something from Adelaide, you owe Adelaide nothing. You don’t need to export stuff to Adelaide.

    Likewise, if you buy something that was made in Germany, you don’t owe Germany anything.

    This terminology was only good for recording specie flow of gold when the world used the fixed currency gold standard. Gold would inflow or outflow and prices would adjust internally.

    Productive exports can help vis a vis currency appreciation to buy exports, but it isn’t necessary.

    The LDP should get on just fine with the Greens, total policy overlap

    Total bullshit, the LDP is basically the anti-Greens, you should reserve judgment until you understand economics you twit.

  117. Anton

    ., if I buy something from Germany Australia buys something from Germany. All good, but at some stage my German supplier would like to get paid. I could work for someone in Australia, but where would they get the money. Eventually somebody has to sell something outside of Australia so that I can pay my German supplier. That is an export.
    Or I need to create money through a debt to the German supplier.

    Engineering analogy
    In my open system of fixed volume (household or country) goods and services inward must equal goods and services outwards AND money flow inwards must equal money flow outwards. Otherwise I have disequilibrium and will either collapse or explode. (Conservation of mass and energy in thermodynamics)

  118. .

    They get paid when you buy it.

    There is no engineering analogy. This is economics. You can’t use trade economics to argue about the strength of a bridge pylon.

  119. Combine Dave

    FFS .
    Forget GDP, at least as we calculate it in Australia. Hopefully we can agree that GDP is a bullshit statistic. Those retail workers, baristas, hairdressers, teachers and bartenders are not going to generate the export earnings required to pay for the goods Australia needs to import.

    Some Australian workers are overpaid, but a lot of the inefficiencies in the economy are imposed by government. These will not magically vanish once protective barriers are removed. So instead of making Australian industry more efficient, it will become extinct. The regulatory burden must be removed first, then protections can be removed. Order is important. There is no point in targeting an optimal point if you can’t plot a feasible path to get there.

    If you (LDP) think sacrificing breadwinner jobs is a worthwhile cost for achieving “efficient markets” we know why your policies will never get accepted by the electorate. Winning elections is a prerequisite for imposing your ideology on a society. There is that “feasible path” thing again

    Since those barriers are now mostly long gone, how about we focus on removing the inefficiencies in the economy as imposed by government?

    Bringing back protectionism won’t allow Australia to export (look at the failure of Holden and Ford to export cars o/s), and as a result won’t allow us to bring in plenty of $$ to help us afford the amazing imports (medical technology, drugs etc…) we couldn’t produce ourselves.

Comments are closed.