今天早上，内阁部长Christopher Pyne宣称联盟党已经赢得大选胜利

mikelee19

信心可嘉

maodoubao

photog

he's gone crazy under pressure.

Junko

aqv 发表于 2016-7-8 11:31
预祝 姐 对冲成功

谢谢

milky_di

cangaru 发表于 2016-7-8 12:10
政府不是公司，不是为了挣钱来的

盈余还不容易么，把资产卖了，只收税不花钱不就盈余了

当然不是为了挣钱，但是钱要花在刀刃上，而且数码要对，不能明明一个项目1块钱就能做下来但却花10块钱。那花钱的这个人要不就是傻子，要不就是有conflict interest. 而且钱不是他的，是所有纳税人的钱。就好象工党拿着纳税人的钱 却要把钱花在难民船民身上，纳税人当然不干。

cangaru

milky_di 发表于 2016-7-8 13:56
当然不是为了挣钱，但是钱要花在刀刃上，而且数码要对，不能明明一个项目1块钱就能做下来但却花10块钱。 ...

工党的船民政策也许有问题，财务控制也是必做的功课，但没有证据表明自由党花钱就有效率，事实是IMF的统计表明乱花钱的政府时期是在自由党时期

从普通人角度看也是这样，象安置难民这种花销，至少钱都花在澳洲的很多SERVICE，但象TONY那样买先进战斗机和导弹到叙利亚去轰炸，那钱就真是打水漂了，对澳洲国内GDP一分的贡献都没有，没准还招来历史上最多的中东难民的涌入，属于打掉牙往肚里咽的那种

simonwang

cangaru 发表于 2016-7-8 14:08
工党的船民政策也许有问题，财务控制也是必做的功课，但没有证据表明自由党花钱就有效率，事实是IMF的统 ...

Kevin Rudd signs off on purchase of 14 F-35 joint strike fighters.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/ ... rg8yo-1225803790418

redmugua

JEANNE1983 发表于 2016-7-8 12:45
赤字是政府稅收少於花錢的結果.  減少赤字, 要不減少花錢, 就是 要不提高稅率.  但是在工黨的時候, 他們花 ...

隔热棉能享受到的得有个house,工党为中产谋福利就是忘本，找骂。

redmugua

milky_di 发表于 2016-7-8 13:56
当然不是为了挣钱，但是钱要花在刀刃上，而且数码要对，不能明明一个项目1块钱就能做下来但却花10块钱。 ...

拿着纳税人的钱打伊拉克把难民打出来了

cangaru

simonwang 发表于 2016-7-8 14:10
Kevin Rudd signs off on purchase of 14 F-35 joint strike fighters.

http://www.theaustralian.com. ...

well, very good example that shows KRUDD spend 3.2 billion whereas TONY raise it to 24 billion, 8 times than labour's spendings
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-po ... 0151127-gl9ubr.html

JEANNE1983

redmugua 发表于 2016-7-8 14:20
隔热棉能享受到的得有个house,工党为中产谋福利就是忘本，找骂。

這個隔熱棉福利真的不需要, 因為不合格, 還要掏錢出來廢掉.   中產是工黨的剝削對象...

JEANNE1983

milky_di 发表于 2016-7-8 13:56
当然不是为了挣钱，但是钱要花在刀刃上，而且数码要对，不能明明一个项目1块钱就能做下来但却花10块钱。 ...

同意. 要花在刀刃上.

milky_di

cangaru 发表于 2016-7-8 14:08
工党的船民政策也许有问题，财务控制也是必做的功课，但没有证据表明自由党花钱就有效率，事实是IMF的统 ...

没有证明自由党有效率，但是知道工党没效率及各种脑残政策。所以说我们这次选举不是选谁好，而是选谁相比没那么差。哎，选民们也是够了。

arpegelin

cangaru

milky_di 发表于 2016-7-8 14:40
没有证明自由党有效率，但是知道工党没效率及各种脑残政策。所以说我们这次选举不是选谁好，而是选谁相比 ...

所以澳洲这次才是一半一半的格局

今后三年可以预料政府不会有何作为

simonwang

cangaru 发表于 2016-7-8 14:28
well, very good example that shows KRUDD spend 3.2 billion whereas TONY raise it to 24 billion, 8  ...

Read the whole news, not just the title: Rudd approved 72 F-35 in total and 14 were signed in 2009, with approval for further acquisitions to be considered in 2012. What Tony Abbott signed off was the rest of 58 F-35 approved by Rudd.

Anyway, I understand your logic now: only choose whatever suits your own argument... and win!

cangaru

simonwang 发表于 2016-7-8 14:48
Read the whole news, not just the title: Rudd approved 72 F-35 in total and 14 were signed in 2009 ...

yes, read the whole news for yourself, KRUDD's was totally 12billion for the whole project, whereas TONY blew it to 24billion because he thought he should buy more garbage from the big brother

simonwang

cangaru 发表于 2016-7-8 14:55
yes, read the whole news for yourself, KRUDD's was totally 12billion for the whole project, wherea ...

So you chose to ignore "at least" $12bn, and replaced it with "totally". You also chose to ignore the "$24 bn" quoted includes $12bn for purchase and $12bn for operating.

How interesting two exact same figures will end up totally different story, which became so powerful and useful for you to blame one party.

The fact is that what Abbott government honoured was the Rudd's approval of the remaining 58 jets, the price was still $12bn.

九家湾

这说明澳洲还是自力更生的人占多数

cangaru

simonwang 发表于 2016-7-8 15:16
So you chose to ignore "at least" $12bn, and replaced it with "totally". You also chose to ignore  ...

if you'd like to drill into details you could see that US increased the garbage price by at least 1 million per jet

however this wasn't the point no matter how you excuse yourself

the fact is KRUDD didn't approve TONY to bomb Syria and consequently intake the most large amount of Syria/middle eastern refugees in recent Australian history, which is of what I said in original post

大成

好闲

simonwang

cangaru 发表于 2016-7-8 15:25
if you'd like to drill into details you could see that US increased the garbage price by at least  ...

You might be right in respect of that we should not go into any war, which I would fully supoort. However, let's face it, regardless which party is in power, the government will follow US and UK.

But I can't agree with your argument that Liberal would "乱花钱". They are the same on the arms deal.

cangaru

simonwang 发表于 2016-7-8 15:33
You might be right in respect of that we should not go into any war, which I would fully supoort.  ...

then we have different opinions

the right wing politicians especially far right like TONY could do anything possible not spending on australian people, rather than on wars (including Iraqi war), international corporate giants etc.

standing with the big brother is indeed the same point for both parties, however there's the difference of the right wing standing in front of the big brother whereas the lefties only follow him, mainly because the different mentality in which the lefties are mainly focus on domestic issues, such as education, health, workers'rights etc.

dqpower

magictime

wsedr

SB一个 抢总理的风头

theforest

澳洲将会有经历最暗淡的3年

liu88

theforest 发表于 2016-7-8 19:51
澳洲将会有经历最暗淡的3年

YOU, if continue to stay in Australia, will be a disaster to this lucky country

Go to any other country, Please!

ANDERXON007

cangaru 发表于 2016-7-8 14:45
所以澳洲这次才是一半一半的格局

今后三年可以预料政府不会有何作为

依稀记得有一个说法，一个好的政府就是看不到的政府，

无为而治，到处都是政府影子的地方不一定幸福。


BTW，海湾战争，美国出兵，付账单最多的是谁？日本人

澳洲政府买的军火，只能算是交给米国的保护费。平时不做service，等到出问题的时候，谁管呢？
别说飞机大炮，咱们的制造业估计连枪都生产不了。托碳税的福，制造业和车厂马上就要S翘翘了

节操

ANDERXON007 发表于 2016-7-8 19:58
依稀记得有一个说法，一个好的政府就是看不到的政府，

无为而治，到处都是政府影子的地方不一定幸福。

讲道理机关枪还是可以生产的，就是在新州，具体地点我就不透露了