Liberal democratic Party and Victorian elections 2015

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by mmm....shiney!, Oct 18, 2014.

  1. LeslieHughesLDP

    LeslieHughesLDP New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You have the patience of a saint, hawkeye :)

    Looking at the comment history of "Newtosilver", it's clear that this user is some type of Rhodes Scholar.

    Well, I can't really speak as a "former member of the shooters party", so perhaps if I pointed out that bullets, depending on the callibre and type, will not always go though people, especially "defensive" ammo, you'd almost look silly in the point you were making, right? Whatever point that was!?

    You are probably right, but the real tragedy is that your genius is seemingly going to waste on this forum.

    ----

    Poe's law? :D
     
  2. renovator

    renovator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    QLD
    I think newtosilver is a relative of campbell newman :lol: a fair bit of fear mongering going on there NTS . too much koolaid for you I think you better lay off the msm media a little bro :p:
     
  3. LeslieHughesLDP

    LeslieHughesLDP New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  4. hawkeye

    hawkeye New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    lol, unfortunately not. Nobody who knows me in real life has ever or would ever say that.

    It's easy when you are sitting behind a keyboard to have a rage fit, say "you stupid idiot" and the like, and let it pass over and then calmly write a response. No-one ever knows. ;)
     
  5. errol43

    errol43 New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Messages:
    6,204
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Location:
    Bundaberg
    If elected what do you or your party intend to do with regards to the bail in and TPP legislation that will no doubt be passes in a shroud of secrecy in 3 weeks time at the G20..

    These laws if passed will have more concern in the long run than any of the laws you want repealed. eg gun, CCTV SPEED CAMERAS, BIKE HELMETS ETC.

    COME ON ONE MORE TIME.. WHAT will you and your party do when our federal and state laws are overruled by CORPORATE LAW.

    A hard question I know, but one that requires an answer.

    Regards Errol 43
     
  6. SpacePete

    SpacePete Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2014
    Messages:
    12,970
    Likes Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    48
    ^^^ VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION ^^^
     
  7. hawkeye

    hawkeye New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    For someone like me, it seemed like he came from nowhere. I still don't know what his true philosophy but I can see that I'm quite fond of him so far. It's not like Ron Paul where he has been around for decades though. Also, being British, the term Liberal-Democrat has a very different meaning for me than it may for you. It doesn't indicate libertarian at all. Is that the history of the LDP in Australia or has it become that way recently? The term liberal has come to mean something quite different than what it did say a century ago. And Democrat? Well, the less said about democracy the better. Is there any thought about changing the name? I know it's just a name but it did turn me off initially and branding is important in this world.

    I think that saying that you despise Politics is a good indicator of a healthy and rational person. I understand the soapbox that politics is. I know that people over decades have really come to believe in these people and listen to what they say, even though conversely they are often pouring scorn on individuals that they don't like and recognising the lot of them as "liars and crooks". Pretty fascinating pyschology going on there when you actually think about it, but it is what it is and the people who actually have positions in parliament, like David L, somehow seem to have more credibility. I even find myself thinking that way instinctively, and I've seen what Ron Paul achieved so it should be something always kept in mind for those of us who want freedom. At the same time the government should always be recognised for what it is and that people's faith has no basis in fact.

    I started to enquire about that but it all just became a huge pain. It's actually easier for me to just hire a private jet and paradrop in, so that's what I'll do. All this privatised stuff just makes everything so hard and you end up having to spend so much more money in the end. It's really ridiculous.

    My own dilemma.

    Well, Rothbard was imo, not only one of the geniuses of the 20th century but also by all accounts one of the nicest guys you could come across. He really doesn't get anywhere near the credit he deserves. For an ancap he was actually fascinated with politics, or so I've heard. Not sure how that works because I can't summon any enthusiasm for it myself.

    I do think times have changed though. If we look at the Libertarian Party in the US, how successful have they been really? When Ron Paul got all the attention he did, it was being part of the Republican Party. Should we have someone get into the Liberal Party and say this kind of stuff? Or are the political dynamics significantly different in Australia? There are a lot of questions that need to be asked I think and the reason I am here is because I haven't yet come across satisfying theories yet. Neither from myself nor anyone else. But I do feel if we get together more and pull more people in, the answers will emerge.
     
  8. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,816
    Likes Received:
    2,135
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    http://www.caseyresearch.com/cdd/sympathy-for-the-devil...-or-at-least-for-a-politician
     
  9. JulieW

    JulieW Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Messages:
    12,959
    Likes Received:
    2,079
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Australia
    I write this in response to the above.

    In USA there is a mechanism in US congress where the politicians get donations from both sides of the political fence saying, in effect, either donate or the legislation you hate will be passed. Donate to me and I'll oppose it.

    When the legislation passes, or fails, the excuses are that the donation didn't guarantee a result, and no matter what 'their' side would have lost anyway. The congressman will of course have received donations from both sides of the fence.

    This is how congress became a millionaire's club and why there will be no change. It is also the reason that corporations donate to both sides of politics.

    "what really pierced his heart was learning that his voters didn't really want what they said they wanted."

    The thing is, that's rubbish. That is the public face and rationalisation of the ripoff.

    Here in Australia, the 'approachable' politician is the stuff of legends of course. Why do you think all the preference deals happen. It's to keep out independents and small parties, and to keep the gravy train running.

    Good luck to the LDP. They'll need it.
     
  10. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,816
    Likes Received:
    2,135
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    I'm not interested in the motivation of the politician in saying that, it's what he said that is more important. The majority are quite content to trade off their liberty for convenience or $$$$$. If this weren't true, then there'd be thousands flocking to the LDP.

    It's fear of freedom, the fear of others and most especially the fear of other's freedom that is the reason most submit to centralised authority.
     
  11. CriticalSilver

    CriticalSilver New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2010
    Messages:
    2,725
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    It's a bit simplistic to be so definitive on a complex issue. Fear is certainly at play, but desire for some advantage (greed) is also a motive and is why welfare is such a great manipulative tool over the population. But ignorance is a factor also. Many people simply have no experience of having to support themselves or are aware that self-respect demands independence and self-realisation depends on freedom. They are encultured into a paradigm of dependence on the state and into conformity to socially engineered norms through their schooling, which is why state control over education is important for totalitarianism to succeed.

    What is sad, though, is that the politicians are themselves simply compromised products of this system of controlled concepts and corrupt incentives. With that observation one can posit that "the system" is self-propagating. It's the walled gaol metaphor; whereby being taught to ignore the walls and constraints, offering sustenance and shelter, promising protection from other inmates and external threats, the prisoners grow to love their prison, become their own jailers, pay for and defend their own imprisonment.
     
  12. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    Inevitably it boils down to game theory and people economising incremental energy expenditure in the expectation of tomorrow being the same or slightly better than today on their perceived risk-weighted basis. <Just like any deterministically operating machine. :) >

    Education about their experience/indoctrination biases with the associated fear of freedom, the fear of others and most especially the fear of other's freedom will change their risk-weightings regarding the benefit of submitting to centralised authority. Then, once people experience the new freedoms (particularly if they have previously experienced the totalitarianism) they will become far less likely to accept the "walled gaol".
     
  13. hawkeye

    hawkeye New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    That's a brilliant analysis CS. Essentially we are all trapped in this system which gradually escalates further out of our control.. Every so often in history the system hits crisis points at which point we do a reset ready to start the whole escalation to crisis again. But who cares? it is our kids that will have to deal with it then.
     
  14. LeslieHughesLDP

    LeslieHughesLDP New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    As a party, we are for free trade. All that is needed for free trade is for the government to get out of the way. On the TPP, since we don't have a policy as such I can't comment on behalf of the party, but I personally do not see the need fur any further trade laws. Also, if the TPP is what it's rumoured to be, I can say with a very high degree of confidence that the party would be against it, and would seek to repeal it if we could.

    With regard to our position on many issues, as we are a party of the classical liberal philosophy, you could almost always infer it. As an example: "Does this new law violate our rights?" If so, we are against it. The word "rights" is thrown around a fair bit and can mean different things to different people "I have a right to a fast internet connection!"; when I am using the word, I am speaking from the classical liberal point-of-view.

    I'm sorry I can't give a better answer, it's just I really do not know much about the TPP, but please trust that we are very much on the side of the individual. If you'd message me your phone number I'd be happy to have a conversation about it.

    Agreed, but in appealing to things that everyone dislikes, we are able to push the greater ideal of individual rights an help people understand why the government is wrong on other issues which they may not necessarily care about.

    On the British meaning, the word "liberal" also means something different in the United States to what it does here. Even the word "libertarian" has differences in meaning over time, particularly between Europe and the United States. On the name, like it or not, we are a democracy, but if there is to be "mob rule" of sorts, it should be "liberal" in the truest sense of the word: to be free. To some a "liberal democracy" might seem like an oxymoron, but in the party, we are truly "liberal", in the absolute sense of the word. Something a bit sideways: Milton Friedman often called himself a "liberal".

    The LDP have been around in some form or another since 2001. John Humphreys, who founded the party, famously took up smoking during the campaign to protest the unfair cigarette taxes. It's fair to say that it's been libertarian since day one, and as someone who is both a candidate and on the Victorian State executive, I can confidently say that the those who make up the core team of the party are very much committed to the classical liberal ideal.

    Ron Paul is a personal hero of mine, and it's what he was able to do with his political soapbox that motivates myself and others I know. I was fortunate enough to get a private sitdown with both Dr. Paul and his wife Carol in his Washington D.C. office in 2012. On recognising what government is, I am a fan of Larkin Rose. (Check out some of his youtube stuff)

    I think they are in the fact that we have (somewhat) proportional representation in our upper houses. This gives minor parties fairer footing on the platform, where this doesn't really exist in the United States. As with Errol43, I'd be happy for a quick phone chat if you sent me across your number.

    Most people are turned off politics for a few rational reasons: Nothing really ever changes no matter who gets voted in. The major parties are basically the same thing, and people know they are going to be lied to. With politics, the most rational thing for most is to stay ignorant for a few reasons: In order to actually understand policy: monetary, health, foreign, individual rights, education, etc... takes hundreds of hours to scratch the surface. You can then spend hundreds of hours reading the policies from each, and even if you are informed, the politicans lie anyway, so their policies are worthless. Given all of that, your vote doesn't really count, and even if it did count and the other group win, as mentioned, nothing changes. Alternatively, you could isntead use your time to play with a yoyo, and you'd probably be better off, in that you now have a skill you didn't....

    Given all of that though, I do believe that if most people knew about the LDP, we'd win. Socially, it's not that we are "liberal", but we are tolerant and believe the government shouldn't interfere in personal life choices. I think most aussies are the same way.... you couldn't care too much about what your neighbour does, as long as they keep the noise down and don't harm those around them. Economically, I think most factory workers don't buy into the "bailout" and corporate welfare non-sense, where their wages must be taxed and given to big rich companies for their own good. The only people really fooled by a lot of the economic non-sense passed off as good policy are some people who went to university and learned about some pretty graphs and pretty theories, which if this information was worth anything, they should be millionaire speculators....

    After all of that though.... as said, yes, many people simply do not want to be free, they just want a nice master.

    CriticalSilver gets it pretty much spot-on in his post.
     
  15. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,816
    Likes Received:
    2,135
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    @ CriticalSilver, I don't necessarily disagree with you, ingrained culture certainly is responsible for much of our behaviour, but it is fear that stalls the evolution of political and social development. Fear of gays taking over, fear of Muslims taking over, fear of druggies taking over, fear of gun owners taking over, fear of private business interests taking over, fear of this, fear of that. It is simplistic because that is the simple reality. For example, people will not support the legalisation of marijuana because the majority believe it will lead to an increase in crime rates such as break and enter as users steal in order to pay for their habits.

    Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a useful tool in being able to identify how government both meets needs and restricts our liberty. Low down in the order of human needs is our need for safety, this is the best that a government can hope to achieve. But in so doing, it places limitations on our abilities to achieve higher order needs, for example sexual intimacy is on the next level from safety, but it is the government that places restrictions on what forms of sexual intimacy ie gay marriage are allowed. The presence of a government in our lives places a ceiling on our abilities to achieve self-actualisation. Government requires a level of fear in society in order to justify its own existence.

    [​IMG]

    So, in order to be successful, it's not enough for the LDP to state and argue their policies, they have to allay voter's fears. That is the biggest hurdle.

    That's shiney's theory anyway.
     
  16. LeslieHughesLDP

    LeslieHughesLDP New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    With the hierarchy posted above, government policy on restricting the supply of land and crippling development with various redtape is threatening the base psychological level in that people are struggling to pay rent and afford a house.

    You are absolutely right that a lot of what is crippling us, is government, and then government presents itself as the solution to our worries by creating dependence which further restrict an individuals progression.

    The issue which a few of you have brought up here is in many ways the core-issue with the public at large, but most do not know any better. One major job of the LDP is to help educate and propose policies which will help everyone, such as removing zoning restrictions on residential properties, allowing people to build anywhere they chose, and thus near-infinitely increasing the supply of available land, reducing costs, and allowing people to fulfill their psychological needs (shelter) at an affordable cost, therefore not needing assistance.
     
  17. renovator

    renovator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    QLD
    Im not sure letting people build wherever they want is a great idea les . I agree people should be able to build in a lot more places than currently acceptable by the powers but stupid people would build in easements & floodzones etc so there needs to be a little regulation .

    More like gazetted no build zones (For the above mentioned reasons)/green zones /wildlife corridors & say 10% of every 100 acres should be left as natural bushland but everywhere else should be open slather .just my thoughts
     
  18. LeslieHughesLDP

    LeslieHughesLDP New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    > Im not sure letting people build wherever they want is a great idea les . I agree people should be able to build in a lot more places than currently acceptable by the powers but stupid people would build in easements & floodzones etc so there needs to be a little regulation .

    If you are going to spend $100k+ on the construction of a house or whatever else, it seems like you would check into these things. Builders could even offer a service in guaranteeing the location to some degree, as could insurers. Here's the thing though, if someone wants to build a house on land which they own, should every single one be forced to beg and deal with inefficient government just because someone, somewhere, might do something stupid?

    As for easements and wildlife areas/etc... clearly the person doesn't own the land.
     
  19. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,816
    Likes Received:
    2,135
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    From another thread:

    How did the LDP arrive at the $40 000 mark?
     
  20. renovator

    renovator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    QLD
    I think you missed the point .

    I agree If they own the land sure they can do whatever they want to their own detriment But if you have bought that land knowing its not zoned for a dwelling i would have to say its your own fault .There does need to be a loosening of the system regarding zoning though .The way it is its trickling the land out & a cash cow for the municipals to subdivide & rezone & as far as i can see is a blatant money grabbing exercise in most cases.

    What im saying is certain parcels of land should never be built on & you need some sort of zoning &/or building restrictions on them . As a builder i know the common person knows sfa about soil profiles/stability & if left up to them to make decisions the house could cost as much to repair than it cost to build because jo blo thought it was a good idea at the time . Also if you asked me to guarantee the location i would be too busy laughing to give u an answer :lol: . Im not guaranteeing anything but my workmanship full stop & accept no responsibility for you decisions . Thats why we have the system we have now .

    Do you also believe if left unchecked people would actually hire a builder or would they DIY ? You would wind up with some third world looking place that no one would want to live except the ferals .Im living in a country where they actually have building codes but are not enforced & there is half built houses everywhere in disrepair it makes the place look like a shithole . In typhoons here (cyclones in oz ) there is shit everywhere that blew off the houses & homeless people scavenging the dregs from the streets & paddocks ,tarps on roofs, dead people from houses collapsing on them & general chaos .I would hate to see parts of oz descend into places like where im at now .

    As for easements & wildlife areas i was talking about big developers . Should they be able to clear fell everything in sight to make a buck ? I would strongly disagree . They need to be responsible for keeping some sort of nature in the equation or you will wind up with 60s/70s style public housing disasters that are either being torn down or privatised these days as they turned out to be not conducive for high volumes of people to be living in .

    I do agree that theres way too many restrictions & hoops to jump through for the average family but we are a first world country with first world expectations for standards . Anyone that has had dealings with councils on a regular basis knows its not too hard to build whatever you want , just have it engineered submit your application pay the fee & wait for approval...no big deal . Its the people not in the industry that think its hard ...its not .

    Its like any other trade/job its easy when you do it all the time but throw a newbie in there & they fall in a heap & wonder why theres so many things you have to do .I would be struggling to do an office clerks job or computer programming saying "isnt there an easier way " but building a house is a breeze because its what i do .
     

Share This Page