SA Footy

Sorry, because it was posted with your other commentary, I thought you were inferring something. Apologies.

BTW, there's still behind-the-scenes muttering about Marshall but who to lead?

Dogwatcher wrote:Sorry, because it was posted with your other commentary, I thought you were inferring something. Apologies.

Usually, the initial charges are like an ambit claim which both sides work through to get agreement on facts and ultimate charge
The process is quite fascinating and people like Abbott, Powell and Edwardson are worth their weight
Money cant buy you justice, but it certainly buys you a better class of it
Note the prosecution is using a SC as well, which, I think, is unusual for the level of this case (ie) it's down to one (or two?) charge. They are matching their opposition

stan wrote:I wasnt aware that apparently Labor had an election promise of 100k new jobs by next year. I would say they would be in the negative at the moment as currently they are reducing the public service numbers.

The main reason the Libs are keeping quiet is because Labor were reasonably on track prior to the change of Federal government. Over 30000 jobs had been created to that point. Unfortunately 20000 of these, primarily in manufacturing have gone under the Abbott government.

bulldogproud2 wrote:

stan wrote:I wasnt aware that apparently Labor had an election promise of 100k new jobs by next year. I would say they would be in the negative at the moment as currently they are reducing the public service numbers.

The main reason the Libs are keeping quiet is because Labor were reasonably on track prior to the change of Federal government. Over 30000 jobs had been created to that point. Unfortunately 20000 of these, primarily in manufacturing have gone under the Abbott government.

Public sector does still have some fat which could be cut. Yes there are many key areas that are required and should be resourced as such. But on the admin side decs and health need bit of a trim.

Decd?

What are your thoughts on the time zone debate in SA thate the government have given Martin Hamilton-Smith the job of running?

Business has been pushing adopting eastern standard time for years, but already it is Noon here by the clock in central standard time when the sun has just reached the directly overhead true Noon in Bendigo. Normal zone time would be 1 hour behind the eastern states and one hour ahead of Perth - and the same time as Tokyo.

The world zone map below shows the NT and SA hatched because we are normally 1/2 hour ahead of zone time. My own view is to favour correct zone time which makes the calculation to adjust to other states easier, and would be more predictable to those overseas. Whether or not we have daylight saving in summer is a completely separate issue.

From my perspective it's either back half an hour or no change. Seriously considering leaving the state if we move it forward. Never been to Perth before......

I've set up a Poll.

bulldogproud2 wrote:

stan wrote:I wasnt aware that apparently Labor had an election promise of 100k new jobs by next year. I would say they would be in the negative at the moment as currently they are reducing the public service numbers.

The main reason the Libs are keeping quiet is because Labor were reasonably on track prior to the change of Federal government. Over 30000 jobs had been created to that point. Unfortunately 20000 of these, primarily in manufacturing have gone under the Abbott government.

I assume you mean "nett" jobs because it is pointless looking at only "jobs created" without factoring in "jobs lost" and I dont know where you can find those individual statistics because I cant find them on the ABS website
Assuming "nett jobs", I am afraid the statistics disproves that assertion:

This is straight out of the ABS spreadsheet: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/6202.0Mar%202015?OpenDocument
Month Full time (Seasonally adjusted)
Feb-2010 538.3
Mar-2010 535.5
Apr-2010 533.4
May-2010 534.5
Jun-2010 536.1
Jul-2010 545.7
Aug-2010 544.9
Sep-2010 544.7
Oct-2010 546.5
Nov-2010 547.6
Dec-2010 542.5
Jan-2011 537.1
Feb-2011 546.5
Mar-2011 545.6
Apr-2011 546.5
May-2011 541.6
Jun-2011 548.8
Jul-2011 543.1
Aug-2011 543.5
Sep-2011 532.0
Oct-2011 534.2
Nov-2011 535.9
Dec-2011 536.6
Jan-2012 536.9
Feb-2012 533.0
Mar-2012 532.2
Apr-2012 528.8
May-2012 535.2
Jun-2012 525.2
Jul-2012 527.0
Aug-2012 526.7
Sep-2012 533.1
Oct-2012 537.5
Nov-2012 539.7
Dec-2012 538.8
Jan-2013 538.0
Feb-2013 532.5
Mar-2013 535.4
Apr-2013 540.8
May-2013 549.0
Jun-2013 540.4
Jul-2013 532.6
Aug-2013 524.2
Sep-2013 532.2
Oct-2013 523.5
Nov-2013 526.4
Dec-2013 528.6
Jan-2014 527.4
Feb-2014 531.0
Mar-2014 526.0
Apr-2014 531.5
May-2014 531.1
Jun-2014 539.2
Jul-2014 533.4
Aug-2014 538.6
Sep-2014 537.7
Oct-2014 544.2
Nov-2014 536.0
Dec-2014 528.4
Jan-2015 536.5
Feb-2015 533.9
Mar-2015 538.1

1. Since the "pledge" there are 200 less full time jobs (on a seasonally adjusted basis)
2. In the month (Sept 2013) the Coalition were elected, there were 6,100 less jobs than at pledge time (on a seasonally adjusted basis)
3. Since the month (Sept 2013) the Coalition were elected, there are 5,900 more jobs (on a seasonally adjusted basis)

I can do "Trend" instead of "Seasonally Adjusted" and "Employed - Total Persons" instead of "Employed - Full Time Persons" but the statements and conclusions are still wrong

The zenith in "Employed - Full Time Persons" was +10,700 in May 2013 (Seasonally Adjusted)
The zenith in "Employed - Total Persons" was +18,300 in May 2013 (Seasonally Adjusted)
The zenith in "Employed - Full Time Persons" was +11,200 in May 2011 (Trend)
The zenith in "Employed - Total Persons" was +15,800 in May 2013 (Trend)

(ie) on any proper basis, there have never been 30,000 more jobs since the pledge.
There were actually 6,100 LESS jobs when the Coalition were elected, and 5,900 MORE jobs in SA since their election

Happy to be proven wrong

The one thing that always worries me is the finger pointing between state and federal politics.

At the end of the day 100k new jobs was always bit of a stretch, you would need a significant boost from mining and defense for this to happen.

Although as Jimmy just pointed out I was right but wrong. Not at the 100k but not negative either.

I don't know how to list so I have loaded it up as a doc
On any basis, there were very few (or negative) jobs created between the pledge (February 2010) and Federal election (September 2013)
and definitely more jobs between the Federal election and now

Statisticians use Seasonally Adjusted and Rann was talking about full time jobs, so you are correct

Bloody hell Jim, im sick of your crap. This damn use of facts and figures to back up your argument has no place in this forum.

stan wrote:Bloody hell Jim, im sick of your crap. This damn use of facts and figures to back up your argument has no place in this forum.

The Govt don't like me.....
I'm doing analysis for one media outlet and they're getting the "heat" for being too "enthusiastic" and not just accepting the Govt line

Jimmy_041 wrote:The Govt don't like me.....
I'm doing analysis for one media outlet and they're getting the "heat" for being too "enthusiastic" and not just accepting the Govt line

The Bolt Report doesn't count as a media outlet.

Gozu wrote:

Jimmy_041 wrote:The Govt don't like me.....
I'm doing analysis for one media outlet and they're getting the "heat" for being too "enthusiastic" and not just accepting the Govt line

The Bolt Report doesn't count as a media outlet.

They are not in Adelaide and you don't count for anything

Poor Tom, the feds think he is a absolute lunatic. Lol some good old fashioned name calling.

stan wrote:Poor Tom, the feds think he is a absolute lunatic. Lol some good old fashioned name calling.

It was very funny
You watch TK sue for defamation now.
They are going to have to build those new courts just to house his cases

Interesting radio, that.

" A lunatic for a treasurer." I reckon those words are still ringing in my ears.

Jimmy_041 wrote:

stan wrote:Poor Tom, the feds think he is a absolute lunatic. Lol some good old fashioned name calling.

It was very funny
You watch TK sue for defamation now.
They are going to have to build those new courts just to house his cases

Loook Briggs maybe right about Tom and disagree with his actions. But he can disagree and make that known without name calling. Perhaps a higher level of professionalism is required from the people who run thw country.