Is our 2 party system just a con?

[Jerry_Atrick]

1 hour ago, Marty_d said:

know you're coming from an enlightened place here - so if the best people were a mix of women and cultural minorities, with not a single middle-aged white man in view, you'd be fine with that.

That's admirable and in that respect I agree with you.

One of the problems of this form of communication is that it misses the subtleties of communication without adding emoticons, so pls forgive me if I have misread the tone of this comment.. But, in the great words of one of the actors in The Young Ines, I detect some sarcasm in that.. 

 

I mean, I could hardly post:

1 hour ago, Marty_d said:

I don't understand what th number of women, men, black, white, Muslim, jew, or swahili have to do with anything in terms of quality of government or workforce for that matter.

if it did matter to me, could I.. welll without being a hypocrite, which is something I try to avoid. Note,I was writing this in the context of a comment that a percentage (in this case, women) being in government is (by itself) a good thing.. 

 

But the reality is, I could really not give a stuff is there was no white person (male of female) in government. I honestly couldn't. An the rest of the post showed you misread my post, which was the fact, by itself,  that Labor has 50% women does not automatically mean good. 

 

Back in the real world, I would expect good government to be drawn from the diversity of the nation - and not in proprotional numbers of the population.. but based on their merit amongst the people available. If there are 20 of the 23 cabinet ministers that are women, or Sikh, or whatever, great, as long as they are the most appropriate people available for the job. You're right - what is the best? It's a judgement call, but promoting someone incompetent to make up a number because thast person happens to have a diverse characteristic (and by your stats, everyone falls into a minority group because there is no majority group being > 50%) is, IMHO, wrong.

 

1 hour ago, Marty_d said:

With the best will and intentions in the world, a group of men cannot make the best decisions regarding the welfare of women, for example. 

Do you have evidence to back this up? I am not being funny, but that isjust a statement of intuition. How do you know this? If the group of men researches and consults widely, rationally and impartially, maybe they can come up with good decisions.For example, when I was doing Criminal law last year, we had to research the law of coercion in NSW. While the women wer advocating for more money for battered women shelters, a man argued that it is the batterer that should be forced toleave the home and protection be provided, and the battered, who normally has kids should have the benefit of the home. Yep.. a man. Funny how it has since been adopted by women as the right thing to do.  I don't want this to be a debate aboutj the battle of the sexes though, but as D&I training teaches us, we should discard our confirmation biases. 

 

Also, what good would a women be to women's causes if she is incompetent? Would rather have a competent man than an incompetent woman to deal with womesn's affairs, right?

 

I gave the Tanya Plibersek example to show that, yeah, here is a woman (part of that 50%) who is very competent. For whatever reason Albos sees fit, he knows she has to be in the cabinet due to the potential threat to his leadership if she is not in there. But he is deliberatly taking what seens a competent politician (notice, I don't use the gender, or race, or whatever, I am worried about the politician) and not utilising her talents. That to me is great she makes up 1 of the 12 or so femaie cabinet ministers; it is not great he doesn't have the best of them doing the jobs most appropriate to their skill set.

 

 

Edited Friday at 11:33 PM by Jerry_Atrick

[Jerry_Atrick]

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

But how much input did you have on the Party's national platform? You role seems to have been to select the person who was most closely aligned to that platform.

I am not sure of the angle of the question.. The POSC is much more than just picking someone that alings to the platform. In fact, factional differences makes it a delicate job. It is (or was) a vetting process covering integrity, capability, stability, commitment, tenaciousness, etc. And then compromising for local factional fights. An MP works awfully hard, despite the reputations they have. The POSC is not designed for forming policy. 

 

But as a delegate to the national (and state) conference, I was involved in debating policy. By then, it is really tidying it up and rarely generates anything material; that is all done at executive committees and sub committees. 

 

It still didn't mean I was less engaged. But, I did become disillusioned and left..But amstill engaged.

[nomadpete]

1 hour ago, onetrack said:

But - When Chat GPT is found out to be just a subtle manifestation of Microsofts aim to conquer Google, and rule the world with an iron fist, and make everyone pay for it, what then? 😢

And exactly how would you find out?

 

Your only source of information is Chat GPT Google search.

 

And A.I. has a self survival algorithm.

(Just like our frail human pollies)

[facthunter]

Survival is NOT assured. Look what happened to the Libs and Greens at the last election. In the Lower house THEIR electorate decides whether they still have a job or not. The Australian Electoral Commission makes sure no voting Inconsistencies  occur. It's an Independ body.  Parties have Policies and if they don't implement them they are Judged harshly for that. The Party's members determine Policy.  BIG contributors no doubt influence that Newspapers  Big Coal and the IPA and Gina etc. Follow the Money Influence. In the USA it's Everything, but in the end It's YOUR Vote that can change things. Vote wisely and when fully informed and you will get Better government . Monopoly Media doesn't help. ALL media Barons have been less than Nice and they are in that game for the Power it allows. Not for Proving INFORMATION.  Nev

[willedoo]

The Nationals trying to tackle One Nation:

 

[onetrack]

Just watch out if that red-headed woman gets the ball! Once that happens, she'll claim she owns the game!

[willedoo]

She'll have to dye her hair maroon in that case. It's a bit too orange to claim ownership of footy here in Qld..

[facthunter]

It IS HER One Notion. It says so in the registered Name.   IF you're Pissed off now vote for Her and find out what it CAN  Really Mean 'Cause she's really Mean.  Nev

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

Our two party system is a con because it has two perpetual parties, the ALP and the Coalition.

 

They've become so predictable, they're boring as all hell. I don't think they even know who or what they are anymore.

[willedoo]

The way parties are shaping up in Australia, a first past the post voting system would possibly spell the end of the two party your turn/my turn system. It would be a bit more like some Europen countries where they need to form broad coalitions to govern. Going by current poll figures, a party like One Nation could swoop up heaps of seats around Australia under a first past the post system. In that case, a lot of people on the left would suddenly become big fans of preferential voting. 

[facthunter]

The Coalition is an unholy alliance based on SOLELY on keeping Labor Out. it has Now destroyed itself because of a Lack of Sellable  and well thought out POLICIES. THEY know THAT. and they are at risk of going out of Business entirely so HOW are they PERPETUAL?   Nev

[willedoo]

1 minute ago, facthunter said:

The Coalition is an unholy alliance based on SOLELY on keeping Labor Out.

That's their job.  It's been the formula for success of every non-Labor government since 1923.

[willedoo]

All the hysterics aside, they'll be back. Just not next time.

[facthunter]

The Libs in particular have Lost their Usual/ Customary . Base under a succession of  "Leaders? " lacking any vision. of note. Howard Abbott Sco Mo and Dutton,  getting progressively Worse. Then the NP stabbed them in the Back after Teals took Blue Ribbon seats. With Friends like LITTLE to be  PROUD of you don't need enemies. Nev

[willedoo]

I think with Dutton, they shot themselves in both feet. It will take a long time to shake that off. It wasn't a winning formula - elect one of the most unpopular politicians in the country as their leader.

[facthunter]

Thay are GONE Mate. You don't recover from HERE. And actually they Deserve to. They talk amongst themselves and didn't listen to those outside their Room. People like Kroger are well and truly, Yesterdays Men. They now have to re-invent themselves and sell the NEW show to the Public. That takes time, Inspiration and MONEY. I wouldn't be betting on it. Nev

[willedoo]

The one to watch will be the Farrer by election. Labor is not fielding a candidate as it's unwinnable for them and they want their votes to go to the Climate 200 independant to beat One Nation. Most commentators are tipping One Nation will miss out on preferences.

[facthunter]

Dutton lost the election and at the same time his seat to a Labor woman who as previously contested the seat of Dixon.. There's NO NP in Qld its only the LNP, so that is somewhat odd as to how it translates nationally.  Nev

[facthunter]

 Ther's no way a party with quite Limited finances can  justify contesting a seat where there is Practically No chance of it winning it.   Now Libs and NP run against each other where Previously they agreed not to. That's extra effort and cost. Nev, 

[willedoo]

The LNP is an odd siuation. It was Lawrence Springborg's baby but I don't kow if it's been of any great electoral advantage in Queensland, maybe, maybe not. The Liberals were never big here. By convention, federal LNP members from Queensland sit with the party that traditionally held that seat, either Liberal or National, but I don't think there's any rules holding them to that. As time has gone by and with electoral boundary changes it might have blurred a bit in the city seats.

 

Bearing in mind Littleproud is an LNP member, it's hard to work out his reasoning in breaking the coalition twice in recent times. Even though they are separate parties federally, the Queensland amalgamation put Littleproud in the situation of damaging his own party. Little wonder he's gone. Canavan is a lot smarter by streets and knows an unhappy coalition couldn't win a chook raffle. Something Littleproud failed to grasp. 

[facthunter]

THAT  Littleproud  Bloke has a LOT to answer for.  Canavan has Mining Interest backing. Nev

[willedoo]

Mining industry backing is a natural for Canavan as mining aligns with his economic beliefs. Just as union backing aligns with Labor party beliefs. He's one to watch and in his case it's an over simplification to pidgeon-hole him. He's got a fairly diverse background. Started out as a communist in high school and uni, got disillusioned with that (the communism, not uni), went on to get an economics degree, worked as an economist for the productivity commission and as a KMPG executive, then Barnaby's chief of staff before entering the senate under the LNP. He has the ability to think things through a lot better than Littleproud, which wouldn't be hard to do.

[willedoo]

Gina has lent Pauline a Kidman plane to fly around SA campaigning.

[Litespeed]

Nothing to see...just a ultra right wing billionaire helping out a mate.

[facthunter]

 That fits. She's been aiding her any way she can, So will have a big say in what she does.. There's bugger all Union influence on anything and little  influence on todays Labor party either, Canavans ( He's only a senator) attitude to the Paris agreement didn't necessarily help the COALition win city Folk either. Farmers don't want fracked gas near their Farms. Littleproud.s all for coal .They Have Money to offer. Not many family farmers these days. They would be friend less.. Labor has been meeting the farmers Federation re the supply of  Fuel, to remote areas. Nev