Are you talking about this particular statement of his?

Cost of living concerns are just code for greed, says Mark Latham (the man with the parliamentary pension).

If the government shuts down, would you notice?

http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/04/news...dex.htm?hpt=T2

How will you be out of work, merc? I thought you worked in a hospital? I'm not being a jerk, I'm really curious. How will this really affect anyone, or is it just theatrics? It's not unprecedented, of course.

It will impact several of my friends a lot. For example, one works at the Library of Congress. He and his family live pretty much paycheck to paycheck because this is an expensive area, and they bought their house at the peak of property values. They have a higher mortgage than I would feel comfortable having. The wife is a freelance writer, and is currently writing a book, but hasn't been paid for it yet. I don't know the details of their finances, but depending on how long it lasts, they could miss a few mortgage payments and be out on the street. Certainly paying other everyday expenses will be difficult.

I work in a law firm, and we are tied very closely to the courts. If the courts are closed, and they will be if there is a shut down, the cases we work on will be delayed. Our clients will expect us to slow our work down during those times. Some work can proceed, like the background stuff that's done on a case, but other work that's more directly tied to court deadlines will stop. My employer will lose money. If it goes on for too long, they will have to cut operating expenses. Probably means unpaid leave after a while. That might mean layoffs. It all depends on how long the children in Congress don't do their jobs.

The economy in this area will lose millions of dollars a day. The multiplier effect in economics is a very real thing. If your paycheck stops, are you going to go spend money? The DC region will take a hit. I imagine that will make most of the rest of the country smile, because fuck DC.

But at least I'll get a seat on Metro. (and they will raise fares in 6 months because of all the lost revenue from the missing government workers.)

Yeah, wow...I would guess, living in DC, you'd see a serious impact.

Part of the funding that is up in the air is the Pell grant. The immediate impact lies in the fact that so many colleges have already estimated aid packages for families: chances are they will have to revise and in some cases revoke those offers. Long term impact is hard to judge.

I hope it doesn't come to that. In answer to my question: yes it will affect many. Trickle down economics on opposite day.

Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

Link
Not a left vs right issue - A top versus "everyone else" issue. Great article...finally. Perhaps it used to be the old 85% blah blah blah ...
It seems its more like the top 1% screwing the rest of us.

The colourful quotes of Mark LathamDecember 2, 2003 from the age

Mark Latham has used some colourful language during his time as a Labor parliamentarian, including the following:

"The role of government is to stimulate market competition, not smother it with tariffs, subsidies and central planning."
- from his maiden speech to parliament.

"Hand in your badge, Adolf."
- directed at former immigration minister Philip Ruddock.

"Howard is an arse-licker. He went over there, kissed some bums, and got patted on the head."
- description of Prime Minister John Howard's trip to the United States.

"That deformed character Tony Staley."
- description of disabled former Liberal Party president.

"If he didn't steal my property he wouldn't have any injuries, so I've done the bare minimum to chase him, to tackle him, to pick up my bag and retrieve the stolen property."
- outlining how he broke the arm of a Sydney taxi driver.

"There they are, a conga line of suckholes on the conservative side of politics."
- on Coalition support for the war in Iraq.

"Bush himself is the most incompetent and dangerous president in living memory."
- on US President George W Bush.

"(John Howard) has forgotten how to be a good Australian, not some yes-man to a flaky and dangerous American president."
- same again.

"F**king idiot."
- Description of satirist from The Chaser program during the last federal election.

"No, I think I made a mistake."
- recanting his call for the reintroduction of corporal punishment in schools.

My assessment is, I've won by two today, I'm one up on him."
- on former Labor PM John Curtin, who won the leadership by one vote in 1935.

"I'm not a white-bread politician, I'm not in that groove, I'll do things according to my own style."
- vowing to watch his language but not change his style.�

Top vs everone else IS a left vs right issue. It is THE left vs right issue.

lol

Thankyou. For a moment I thought I'd slipped into some strange parrallel world.

Sure it is ... if you are buying what the left is selling. Personally, I'm not.

That was one of the main points I took out of the article.

Cheers Ali. I'd forgotten about some of these.

In a nutshell, Latham believes in rules for everyone else and another rule for himself (which is whatever suits him best at the time with no thought for consistency). There's always a reason for whatever he does and he will defend it to the death irrespective of how hypocritical his defense is.

I think superficially Keating is a similar character to Latham, but a much better politician.

I'm not sure how. The article makes a bit of a case for it not being a Republican vs Democratic issue, as virtually all congresspeople are or end up rich, but even so:

1) Whether a congresssperson is a 1%er or not isn't relevant; what's relevant is how they vote on those issues.

2) There are many Democrats and many votes by Democrats that the left is pissed at.

Voting to enrich the wealthy is bipartisan, because the hard right Republicans (all of them, these days) and the center right Democrats do it. Just because its bipartisan doesn't mean it's not a left-right issue.

They are voting to enrich themselves, their families & friends, associates and their own wealth.
Voting for the common man is idealistic - not reality. No matter how it is sold.
The controlling few at the top of the two parties are more similar than different. They are selling the same thing - they just have different pitches.
The reality is that the top 1% vote in their own best interests irrespective of party affiliation.

My favourite one is the conga line of arseholes. lol

How could we forget Mr Keating calling us all scumbags? lol

What a charmer. :)

I dont disagree that they all enrich themselves, but they are also in the top 1% because of basic demographic factors (before they even came into Congress) -- they are generally older, more highly educated, more professional white collar background, more male, etc. than the general public.

But their underlying philosophies of government are diametrically opposed at the very core on most issues with the right being more supportive of big business and the wealthy and the left being more supportive of the working class and the socially and economically disadvantaged.

It goes even beyond elected officials. One only need to look at Supreme Court decisions to see the same left-right split over interests.