# The Turnbull Government



## drsmith (14 September 2015)

54 to 44.

Julie Bishop survives as deputy leader with around 70-odd votes.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> 54 to 44.
> 
> Julie Bishop survives as deputy leader with around 70-odd votes.




Any bets on the Treasurer ?

Likely Morrison ?


----------



## drsmith (14 September 2015)

Morrison.


----------



## So_Cynical (14 September 2015)

You're taking this well Doc?


----------



## explod (14 September 2015)

New era,  Turnbull my preference within libs. 

Maybe we will be told now where the jobs are going to come from and that they actually do something about it. 

And stop the senseless bombing of something of no value or help to people nearly on the other side of the planet.


----------



## basilio (14 September 2015)

54-44 is no substantial victory given how tough the right wingers play politics.I  just can't see how the majority of the current cabinet is going to stay in place.

I think that the real winner of this will end up being Scott Morrison.  I can see Malcolm Turnball being kicked from pillar to post by the shock jocks,. I see him being unable to implement any of the policies that made him at least acceptable to middle Australia (review of CC policies, review of asylum seeker treatment, equal marriage).

Inside the party I just can't see his supporters having the stomach or the bottle to face down people like Brandis, Abetz, and co. 

I completely agree with Malcolms position on opening up policy discussions and treating  the public with intellectual respect. I just don't believe the  current power brokers in the Liberal party ( and probably the labour Party) are on the same page.


----------



## Tisme (14 September 2015)

I think we are about to see whether someone has the ticker to take charge.


----------



## explod (14 September 2015)

The substance within his opening speach very refreshing. 

Time will tell on follow through.


----------



## banco (14 September 2015)

basilio said:


> 54-44 is no substantial victory given how tough the right wingers play politics.I  just can't see how the majority of the current cabinet is going to stay in place.
> 
> I think that the real winner of this will end up being Scott Morrison.  I can see Malcolm Turnball being kicked from pillar to post by the shock jocks,. I see him being unable to implement any of the policies that made him at least acceptable to middle Australia (review of CC policies, review of asylum seeker treatment, equal marriage).
> 
> (




He'll focus on economic reform.


----------



## sydboy007 (15 September 2015)

Lets see how much the party will let him drag them back towards the centre.  His popularity will wane considerably if he sticks to too many of the current policies.

I hope he can bring about some meaningful economic reforms, but with such a small win to be PM I fear he'll face a lot of white anting from within.  Time will tell.

Fingers crossed a more effective PM will force a more effective opposition and then we all benefit.

Hard to feel sorry for Tony.  $300K pension is not a bad consolation prize.


----------



## qldfrog (15 September 2015)

Well quite happy  but it comes so late and the damages are so huge to the country after both Julia G and Tony A. that I do not give him much hope,
And then thinking that he has to deal with a party room which was still supporting Abbott a few month ago, not only will he face the legacy but i am afraid it will be endless back stabbing;
Respect for daring to take control of a sinking ship in these conditions!


----------



## Knobby22 (15 September 2015)

He will be great. The election is one year away. The party will now act to get back in.
We haven't had a good leader since Howard.

As Laurie Oakes said, Shorten looks almost as upset as Abbott.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 September 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> As Laurie Oakes said, Shorten looks almost as upset as Abbott.




Yep. Shorten now has to rise to the challenge and prove he's got what it takes to be PM.


----------



## noco (15 September 2015)

explod said:


> New era,  Turnbull my preference within libs.
> 
> Maybe we will be told now where the jobs are going to come from and that they actually do something about it.
> 
> And stop the senseless bombing of something of no value or help to people nearly on the other side of the planet.




Just get barnacle Bill to agree to the CHAFTA.....that is where the jobs will come from but Bill does not care about our Mums and Dads and jobs.....Bill is a job destroyer....Bill is just a political point scorer...His initials BS explains Bill well.

Any way Bill will be next to face the chopping block.


----------



## noco (15 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Yep. Shorten now has to rise to the challenge and prove he's got what it takes to be PM.




The only thing Shorten has got is hairs around his bottom and that is where his brain is located as well.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 September 2015)

noco said:


> The only thing Shorten has got is hairs around his bottom and that is where his brain is located as well.




A very inciteful (spelling intended) analysis.

Not ad hominem at all.


----------



## overhang (15 September 2015)

It's going to be interesting to see what the polls decide, we know many conservatives see him as a Labor politician clone hiding in the Liberal party but he is far more appealing to the moderates than Abbott was, Bishop would have been the good middle ground between the two. 

The only way things can stablise for the Liberals is if Abbott retires but even then you have people like Corey Bernardi who will always be quite an outspoken critic of Turnbull within the party and Turnbull has no hope of winning over the likes of Andrew Bolt.  
How he handles policys that we know he has a quite strong progressive stance on like climate change, gay marriage and a republic will define how the conservatives view him.


----------



## Tisme (15 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> A very inciteful (spelling intended) analysis.
> 
> Not ad hominem at all.




I must admit I am rather surprised there hasn't been more attacking Rudd and Gillard in this thread. The Liberal Party rusted ons have had more years of snide Abbott sloganeering than a waterboarder has endured at Guantanamo Bay, I would have thought the zombie statements and fallacious arguments would be every second post. 

BTW I didn't see Noco in the corridors yesterday or in the party room.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 September 2015)

overhang said:


> It's going to be interesting to see what the polls decide, we know many conservatives see him as a Labor politician clone hiding in the Liberal party but he is far more appealing to the moderates than Abbott was, Bishop would have been the good middle ground between the two.
> 
> The only way things can stablise for the Liberals is if Abbott retires but even then you have people like Corey Bernardi who will always be quite an outspoken critic of Turnbull within the party and Turnbull has no hope of winning over the likes of Andrew Bolt.
> How he handles policys that we know he has a quite strong progressive stance on like climate change, gay marriage and a republic will define how the conservatives view him.




One wonders if the Libs will treat Turnbull like they treated Abbott, as a vehicle to get them into government (or in Turnbull's case keep them there), after that dump him for ideological reasons.


----------



## Tisme (15 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> One wonders if *the Libs* will treat Turnbull like they treated Abbott, as a vehicle to get them into government, after that dump him for ideological reasons.




Which LIBS are we talking about?:- Rupert Murdoch who had a secret squirrel meeting(s) with the likes of Hockey a few weeks back; the North Shore Diocese; Melbourne's South East Man's Club; or the inconsequential party loyals who will vote for a pig with lipstick and a tutu, so long as it has a blue riband around its neck and a placard similar to "Ditch the Witch"......all class.


----------



## Tisme (15 September 2015)

Almost forgot ...congratulations to Josh Frydenberg on becoming to the Liberal Party what Bill Shorten was to the Labor Party during Rudd/Gillard era .... that's gotta get up Chris Pyne's goat.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> Which LIBS are we talking about?:-




The Conservative Right who are still pretty powerful. Bernadi et al. Their Machievellian minds would probably just regard Turnbull as the means to an end, to get them back in power, and somewhere in the wings a new Tony Abbott lurks.


----------



## McLovin (15 September 2015)

I hold high hopes for Turnbull. Let's see how it turns out.


----------



## pixel (15 September 2015)

McLovin said:


> I hold high hopes for Turnbull. Let's see how it turns out.




+1
MT is certainly more cautious with his words and decisions than TA; "Engage Brain before opening Mouth." That should lessen the chance of his suffering from foot-in-mouth disease. Hopefully, it will also rub off on his front bench colleagues - assuming he finds a suitable bunch that manage to avoid gaffes and don't offend other countries' representatives.

I'll give Malcolm the benefit - at least until the next Elections.


----------



## McLovin (15 September 2015)

pixel said:


> +1
> MT is certainly more cautious with his words and decisions than TA; "Engage Brain before opening Mouth." That should lessen the chance of his suffering from foot-in-mouth disease. Hopefully, it will also rub off on his front bench colleagues - assuming he finds a suitable bunch that manage to avoid gaffes and don't offend other countries' representatives.
> 
> I'll give Malcolm the benefit - at least until the next Elections.




One of the things Mal might be able to do is slow down the media. At the moment they make pollies jump through hoops everyday, constantly asking them to rule things in or out. Paul Keating was asked a few months ago about whether you could lead in a 24h media cycle world and he said (my paraphrasing) of course, come up with good policy and the journos will need half a day to understand it, so they won't be sitting around waiting for some non-story to blow out of proportion.


----------



## noco (15 September 2015)

pixel said:


> +1
> MT is certainly more cautious with his words and decisions than TA; "Engage Brain before opening Mouth." That should lessen the chance of his suffering from foot-in-mouth disease. Hopefully, it will also rub off on his front bench colleagues - assuming he finds a suitable bunch that manage to avoid gaffes and don't offend other countries' representatives.
> 
> I'll give Malcolm the benefit - at least until the next Elections.




Not so with the Gordon Greich gaff when Rudd was PM.


----------



## sinner (15 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> or the inconsequential party loyals who will vote for a pig with lipstick and a tutu, so long as it has a blue riband around its neck and a placard similar to "Ditch the Witch"......all class.




Too good to not repeat. Anyway, came here to propose a new flag for Australia


----------



## trainspotter (15 September 2015)

The thing I liked about MT was the way he handles the press. No nonsense and he wont take any crap during being questioned. None of this ... er er ah ah, let me just say this BS. No stuttering and not being talked over by the journo hacks trying to put words in his mouth.


----------



## Tisme (15 September 2015)

Remember?


----------



## MrBurns (15 September 2015)

For the first tie in a very long time I actually feel good about our leader, I think Malcolm will be at the helm for a long time. It's a good day.

Chris Uhlmann said 3 people have to go if Australian politics is to get back on track, Gillard, Rudd and Abbott, he was right.


----------



## noco (15 September 2015)

sinner said:


> Too good to not repeat. Anyway, came here to propose a new flag for Australia
> 
> View attachment 64303




I thought you might have placed a hammer and sickle instead.


----------



## sydboy007 (15 September 2015)

noco said:


> Just get barnacle Bill to agree to the CHAFTA.....that is where the jobs will come from but Bill does not care about our Mums and Dads and jobs.....Bill is a job destroyer....Bill is just a political point scorer...His initials BS explains Bill well.
> 
> Any way Bill will be next to face the chopping block.




So Noco, exactly how many jobs are forecast to be bequeathed to the Australian economy?

What seems to be the hidden message in the deal is the major benefits to Australia are via cheaper imports.  That doesn't sound very jobs creating to me.

I will be interested to see what you can dig up from behind the veil of Govt secrecy.


----------



## drsmith (15 September 2015)

Malcolm Turnbull's polling high point,



> New Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has received an immediate bounce in the polls after ousting Tony Abbott.
> 
> A snap Morgan poll taken this afternoon on who Australian voters regard as the better PM has found Mr Turnbull is preferred by 70 per cent of voters compared to 24 per cent for Bill Shorten.
> 
> ...



I'd suggest in that there's a significant element of expectation that Mal will be the best Labor/Green PM Australia ever has.

Managing that expectation is going to be a significant task in itself.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...528934171?sv=abc71b399de1b502550c945756911844


----------



## drsmith (15 September 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> You're taking this well Doc?




One has to be pragmatic when it comes to politics. 

I still have some doubts about Malcolm stemming from his time as opposition leader and from that under Tony Abbott, he wasn't always as loyal as he could have been. He did on occasion at the very least engage in the more subtle forms of disloyalty. 

While in my view, the Abbott government was far better than the Rudd/Gillard administrations the preceded his, but it and him as PM in particular weren't good enough. The voting public as a whole I'd suggest demand higher standards from the Coalition in its natural area of strengths when compared to Labor in the same portfolio's. Perhaps that's a product of satisfying the social conscience, some of which is misguided.

Malcolm will have a number of challenges.

1) Reuniting the party after the coup. 

This looks like it will be easier than it was in Labor after Gillard knocked of Rudd. I note that at question time at least, there were no resignations from the front bench.

2) Managing public expectations. 

This will be a biggie. I suspect the above Morgan poll will be a high point as on those numbers, almost everyone expects him to he everything. At some point, some of that 70% preferred PM support will be disappointed.

3) Politics. 

Articulating the case is all well and good but he has to have learned that politics is not like the board of a company where all in the room are trying to achieve a common goal. The parliamentary chamber is very different. The alternative is trying to beat you and I wonder how well he understood that when formally opposition leader. He has to get the balance between articulation of ideas and the politics right.

As for TA, he, put simply, wasn't good enough to survive as PM. Too much political animal there. His prime-ministership may have fared much better if MT was treasurer as their individual political characteristics may have been a counter balance to the other.

TA was also loyal to his party supporters to a fault and that was reflected in the overall quality of his front bench and original speaker.

Malcolm's great assets are that he's had a broader life experience than a pure career politician and is an articulate public speaker. He has the potential at least to be a great PM.


----------



## noco (15 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> So Noco, exactly how many jobs are forecast to be bequeathed to the Australian economy?
> 
> What seems to be the hidden message in the deal is the major benefits to Australia are via cheaper imports.  That doesn't sound very jobs creating to me.
> 
> I will be interested to see what you can dig up from behind the veil of Govt secrecy.




There will be tousands and tousands of jobs, don't you worry about dat.


----------



## galumay (15 September 2015)

The real challenge for Turnbull will be to overcome those forces that have highjacked the Liberal party, the fundamentalist and extremist christian nuts being the most dangerous to him. The Tea party style super-drys are also deeply embedded in what used to be a party of real 'liberals'. Both groups will be full of spite and revenge so it will take some real statesmanship and leadship to purge their influence.

His other great danger is the previous government's Goebbels, Minister of Propoganda, Rupert Murdoch and his minions. We have already seen the bias, poison, vitriol, bile and outright visciousness they are capable of, they are also probably harder to deal with than the enemies within the party.

I hope for australia's sake he can pull it off. Maybe if the ALP can get rid of Little Bill as well then there is the potential for some real bipartisan government between the 3 major parties.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 September 2015)

Giving water policy to the Nationals is like giving a gamekeeper role to the poachers.

It's bad news for the long term sustainability of the river systems.

As a former Water Minister, I hope Malcolm choked somewhat over that.


----------



## sydboy007 (16 September 2015)

noco said:


> There will be tousands and tousands of jobs, don't you worry about dat.




Seriously.  We're to take it on faith that if you sign the FTA the jobs will come.

Sorry Noco.  That might work well on your flock of neconservative worshippers, but I'm a bit more of a realist than that.

From what I've read the 3 FTAs with North Asia are estimate to not even create 10000 jobs a year between them.  Considering that employment stats can jump around more than 1000 month to month it will be nearly impossible to determine exactly what impact these agreements have.

*Even more concerning, is the fact that Chinese businesses can negotiate “concessions” with the Department of Immigration and that these will be stipulated as a term of a private contract between the two parties and not be on the public record.* This allows the Executive arm of government enormous discretion in the making of these arrangements, with limited opportunity for transparency and public accountability.

Still on the topic of transparency, the ChAFTA has also allowed the Executive arm of government to sign an agreement with a foreign government that goes against the parliament’s wishes in 2013 that Australia’s temporary migrant worker programme include employer-conducted labour market testing.

This requirement, approved of by the Australian parliament, has been circumvented through the ChAFTA as Chinese businesses will not have to prove that there are no local workers available to perform an occupation prior to the hiring of a Chinese worker.

To me it's asking to be colonised.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 September 2015)

noco said:


> There will be tousands and tousands of jobs, don't you worry about dat.




For Chinese workers, yes.


----------



## noco (16 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Seriously.  We're to take it on faith that if you sign the FTA the jobs will come.
> 
> Sorry Noco.  That might work well on your flock of neconservative worshippers, but I'm a bit more of a realist than that.
> 
> ...




Sydboy, you and Rumpy are pessimists and wishful thinkers that the CHAFTA will fail....Stop running with your comrades in the CFMEU.....There are some very bad people in the CFMEU as the TURC is finding out....Do you both like mixing with bad people?

You have to take a leaf out of the books of Andrews, Whetheral, Foley, Palaszxzuk, Bob Hake, Bob Carr, Simon Crean and that famous union leader Martin Ferguson....They can all see the benefits. 

Are all these staunch true Labor men all wrong and you, the CFMEU and barnacle Bill right? 

Give in fellows...you are losing the battle.


----------



## overhang (16 September 2015)

On the polling it is to be expected that MT will see an instant turn around in the polls.  Gillards first newspoll after the back stabbing of Rudd was 53-29 as preferred prime minister and also lead the two party preferred 53-47.  At the moment he is on the honeymoon period and the electorate is just happy to get rid of the largely incompetent Abbott.

MT is going to be breath of fresh air as he doesn't appear to use the 3 word catch phrases so famous with Abbott, I just hope he drops the fear mongering agenda that Abbott used so strongly.

What does he do with Hockey who refused to step down as treasurer?  Surely he can't be kept on the front bench with the public perception of him and frankly anything other than a role as treasurer is going to be a slap in the face to Hockey so MT may as well send him to the back bench to hide him from the public.


----------



## Knobby22 (16 September 2015)

You've got to feel a little sorry for Hockey.
He thought he was the man who was going to be leader when they deposed of Turnbull the first time, but Abbott tricked him. Ambition thwarted, it will be interesting to see what happens to Hockey next.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 September 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> You've got to feel a little sorry for Hockey.
> He thought he was the man who was going to be leader when they deposed of Turnbull the first time, but Abbott tricked him. Ambition thwarted, it will be interesting to see what happens to Hockey next.




Apparently Hockey has been offered Communications.


----------



## overhang (16 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> From what I've read the 3 FTAs with North Asia are estimate to not even create 10000 jobs a year between them.  Considering that employment stats can jump around more than 1000 month to month it will be nearly impossible to determine exactly what impact these agreements have.




This is actually a largely exaggerated figure too that has been sprouted by the coalition, the supposed economic managers continue to stuff the numbers up from their own report just like the embellished the FTTP NBN costing and understated their own FTTN costings, they can't be trusted with numbers.

According to their own report 



> The annual employment increase from the combined liberalisations (compared
> with what would otherwise have been the case) is expected to:
> –
> start at 7 900 persons in 2016;
> ...




Now as you put keep in mind this is actually all three free trade agreements (China, Korea and Japan) and yet it will only produce a maximum 15k jobs and dwindle to just 5400 by 2035.  To put this in prospective this will increase the employment rate by just 0.04% in 2035.





The key thing to note here is that these are not additional jobs each year, they are the total jobs added since the beginning of the projected FTA.


The report his here http://dfat.gov.au/about-us/publica...c-modelling-of-australias-north-asia-ftas.pdf

We need to add more protection for Australian jobs before we sign these jobs away to the Chinese who don't spend their income here anyway and send it back home.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 September 2015)

Turnbull and his henchmen were big noting themselves about signing a NDIS agreement, not a word about whose idea it was is the first place.


----------



## sydboy007 (16 September 2015)

overhang said:


> This is actually a largely exaggerated figure too that has been sprouted by the coalition, the supposed economic managers continue to stuff the numbers up from their own report just like the embellished the FTTP NBN costing and understated their own FTTN costings, they can't be trusted with numbers.
> 
> According to their own report




The fact there's be no analysis of past FTAs and their impact on the economy says it all really.  We're told they're good for us, but no one really knows.

The fact some trust the Govt in engaging to negotiate these FTAs for the good of the people is laughable.  The TPP was going to tie us up in litigation from large multinational companies and increase the cost of all forms of IP used by business and consumers.


----------



## Tisme (16 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Turnbull and his henchmen were big noting themselves about signing a NDIS agreement, not a word about whose idea it was is the first place.




That'd be Howard, Fraser or Menzies for sure. It's like the Chinese have invented everything five thousand years before we became bipedal.


----------



## sydboy007 (16 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Apparently Hockey has been offered Communications.




It's often said the one eyed man is king in the kingdom of the blind.  Not sure I'd want foot in mouth hockey in the communications portfolio.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> It's often said the one eyed man is king in the kingdom of the blind.  Not sure I'd want foot in mouth hockey in the communications portfolio.




The NBN is Turnbull's baby. I think he'll keep Hockey under the thumb. Joe knows his position in Cabinet is precarious and will toe the line.


----------



## Macquack (16 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Apparently Hockey has been offered Communications.




The Parliament Catering Portfolio is more his speed.


----------



## galumay (16 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> It's often said the one eyed man is king in the kingdom of the blind.  Not sure I'd want foot in mouth hockey in the communications portfolio.




Could he be any worse than Turdbull was?! For someone supposedly down with the intrawebs, he has made an almighty hash of the NBN, the decision to use FTTN instead of FTTH was a catosrophically stupid decision as experts like Simon Hackett have said. Despite castrating the NBN costs have still blown out by billions, so we are gettting a sub-bar, soon to be redundant fibre network at a high price.

I think his reputation around IT is greatly exaggerated - its probably just that its slightly ahead of the 1950's knowledge level of most others in parliament.


----------



## drsmith (16 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Could he be any worse than Turdbull was?! For someone supposedly down with the intrawebs, he has made an almighty hash of the NBN, the decision to use FTTN instead of FTTH was a catosrophically stupid decision as experts like Simon Hackett have said. Despite castrating the NBN costs have still blown out by billions, so we are gettting a sub-bar, soon to be redundant fibre network at a high price.
> 
> I think his reputation around IT is greatly exaggerated - its probably just that its slightly ahead of the 1950's knowledge level of most others in parliament.



I've posted the following in the NBN thread on more than one occasion and I know it's difficult listening for those who bought Stephen Conroy's FTTP NBN fantasy but for a broader perspective, it's well worth a listen.

http://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/


----------



## banco (16 September 2015)

Macquack said:


> The Parliament Catering Portfolio is more his speed.




Might burst his gastric band if he's not careful.


----------



## drsmith (16 September 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> You've got to feel a little sorry for Hockey.
> He thought he was the man who was going to be leader when they deposed of Turnbull the first time, but Abbott tricked him. Ambition thwarted, it will be interesting to see what happens to Hockey next.



IIRC, Joe hockey's position on Kevin Rudd's ETS was to allow a conscience vote within the Liberal Party.

Not much point changing from Malcolm then if for Labor it was a binding vote.


----------



## noco (17 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> The fact there's be no analysis of past FTAs and their impact on the economy says it all really.  We're told they're good for us, but no one really knows.
> 
> The fact some trust the Govt in engaging to negotiate these FTAs for the good of the people is laughable.  The TPP was going to tie us up in litigation from large multinational companies and increase the cost of all forms of IP used by business and consumers.








NZ happy if Australia's China deal fails

    AAP
    September 17, 2015, 6:39 am

Share

If Australia's free trade deal with China should falter it would benefit New Zealand, the country's prime minister says.

The new government under Malcolm Turnbull has fast-tracked legislation for the agreement, trying to pressure Labor - which has concerns it will cost Australian jobs - to lock in the deal.

*But New Zealand's John Key told the Australian Financial Review on Thursday the benefits of its deal with China have been 11 times greater than the most optimistic estimates and the country would be "quite happy" if Australia's failed.*


----------



## sydboy007 (17 September 2015)

noco said:


> NZ happy if Australia's China deal fails
> 
> AAP
> September 17, 2015, 6:39 am
> ...


----------



## overhang (17 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> I've posted the following in the NBN thread on more than one occasion and I know it's difficult listening for those who bought Stephen Conroy's FTTP NBN fantasy but for a broader perspective, it's well worth a listen.
> 
> http://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/




Yes you keep posting that all while ignoring his many comments and more recent comments that state 







> "Fibre to the node is the least-exciting part of the current policy – no argument," he said. "If I could wave a wand, it's the bit I'd be erasing."
> 
> Speaking at the Rewind/Fast Forward event in Sydney on Wednesday, Internode founder Mr Hackett said he was a strong supporter of connecting premises directly to fibre and was on the board of NBN Co to make it "as least worse as possible".




http://www.afr.com/technology/nbns-simon-hackett-slams-fibretothenode-technology-20150325-1m77el

Not exactly glowing accolades for the coalition NBN.


----------



## Tisme (17 September 2015)

It's pretty impressive how the defenders of their (probably their parent's) chosen political party are compelled to defend a rubbish piece of infrastructure like the MkII NBN, just because it is their chosen party's Frankenstein's Monster. 

The Power of Mal compels you, Power of Mal compels you, Power of Mal compels you, ...get behind me, (Labor) Satan! You are a stumbling block to me .......


----------



## sydboy007 (17 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> It's pretty impressive how the defenders of their (probably their parent's) chosen political party are compelled to defend a rubbish piece of infrastructure like the MkII NBN, just because it is their chosen party's Frankenstein's Monster.
> 
> The Power of Mal compels you, Power of Mal compels you, Power of Mal compels you, ...get behind me, (Labor) Satan! You are a stumbling block to me .......




Needs to be said in a sing song voice as Bill Burr can only do

say what we say when we say it
Say it again then you can go home to your toys

All right I'll say it
And I'll say it again
Now can I go home to my toys

But yes, i can't imagine any of the Liberal supporters lettign Labor get away with buying a copper network and admitting they have no idea of the condition of said copper is, nor how much they will have to spent on top of their purchase price to get it into a usable state.


----------



## drsmith (17 September 2015)

overhang said:


> Yes you keep posting that all while ignoring his many comments and more recent comments that state



Have you listened to it ?

If you do, you'll find it puts everything into context including FTTN.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> But yes, i can't imagine any of the Liberal supporters lettign Labor get away with buying a copper network and admitting they have no idea of the condition of said copper is, nor how much they will have to spent on top of their purchase price to get it into a usable state.




Labor doesn't seem to be doing their job either, to hold the government to account over the NBN.

Who is Labor's spokesman on the NBN ? Albanese ? I haven't heard a word from him on this issue.


----------



## overhang (17 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> Have you listened to it ?
> 
> If you do, you'll find it puts everything into context including FTTN.




Yes I listened to it long ago and it really doesn't put much into context all with the FTTN at all.  The admission of Simon Hacketts is that previous NBN board was running the show very inefficiently,  he was quite optimistic about the use of HFC networks but didn't share the same passion about the FTTN.  

I think you'll find his more recent comments give a greater context of the FTTN, please don't ignore those comments to fit the narrative you want to follow.


----------



## drsmith (17 September 2015)

overhang said:


> Yes I listened to it long ago and it really doesn't put much into context all with the FTTN at all.  The admission of Simon Hacketts is that previous NBN board was running the show very inefficiently,  he was quite optimistic about the use of HFC networks but didn't share the same passion about the FTTN.
> 
> I think you'll find his more recent comments give a greater context of the FTTN, please don't ignore those comments to fit the narrative you want to follow.



Perhaps you should listen to it again. If you do, you'll note that problems with the rollout before the government changed went beyond the board. Simon specifically mentions political influence in reference to the former Labor government.

What's in the above article about FTTP isn't materially different to what he said in the presentation. He has always preferred FTTP as technology of choice. The presentation though goes into more detail both directly on FTTN and the kind of wand that would have to be waved to get FTTP (more money). That hasn't changed.


----------



## overhang (17 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> Perhaps you should listen to it again. If you do, you'll note that problems with the rollout before the government changed went beyond the board. Simon specifically mentions political influence in reference to the former Labor government.
> 
> What's in the above article about FTTP isn't materially different to what he said in the presentation. He has always preferred FTTP as technology of choice. The presentation though goes into more detail both directly on FTTN and the kind of wand that would have to be waved to get FTTP (more money). That hasn't changed.




You're using him to push a point on FTTN when he doesn't support FTTN and never has.  He believes that FTTP should be used in conjunction with HFC networks where possible.  

I hope he does a new blog soon as it will be interesting what he has to say now that the new corporate plan has been released that shows that the coalition NBN is going to be well over budget whilst the FTTP is well under the projected costing that the coalition campaigned on.  Considering it's widely acknowledged including by MT that FTTP is the end game and that we will require FTTP some time in the future then at what point does it become economically sensible to pay the bit more for FTTP now than in the future considering the % difference between the two plans has come down dramatically from the coalition campaign.  FTTN is also substantially more difficult to estimate costs due to the rather unknown state of the network and will be more prone to cost blowouts then FTTP.


----------



## drsmith (17 September 2015)

overhang said:


> You're using him to push a point on FTTN when he doesn't support FTTN and never has.  He believes that FTTP should be used in conjunction with HFC networks where possible.




If you review the original point I made in this thread, it was about FTTP, specifically the FTTP rollout under Labor.



drsmith said:


> I've posted the following in the NBN thread on more than one occasion and I know it's difficult listening for those who bought Stephen Conroy's FTTP NBN fantasy but for a broader perspective, it's well worth a listen.
> 
> http://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/






overhang said:


> I hope he does a new blog soon as it will be interesting what he has to say now that the new corporate plan has been released that shows that the coalition NBN is going to be well over budget whilst the FTTP is well under the projected costing that the coalition campaigned on.  Considering it's widely acknowledged including by MT that FTTP is the end game and that we will require FTTP some time in the future then at what point does it become economically sensible to pay the bit more for FTTP now than in the future considering the % difference between the two plans has come down dramatically from the coalition campaign.  FTTN is also substantially more difficult to estimate costs due to the rather unknown state of the network and will be more prone to cost blowouts then FTTP.



If you want to live in the hope that he says something different to what he's said before, that's up to you.

Page 39 of the 2016 corporate plan reveals the latest cost ranges for FTTP and MTM.



> Management estimates that an all-FTTP fixed line rollout could be completed by 2026 but possibly as late as 2028, with a peak funding range of $74-84 billion (vs. $46-56 billion for MTM) depending on critical sensitivities around peak construction rates, construction and operating cost, and revenue generation.
> 
> First positive free cash flow is estimated to be achieved between FY26 and FY31 for an all-FTTP fixed line rollout (vs. FY22 for MTM).


----------



## overhang (17 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> If you review the original point I made in this thread, it was about FTTP, specifically the FTTP rollout under Labor.




And in making that point you used Simon Hackett who doesn't support the FTTN that you support and actually still supports the FTTP, he isn't an example you should use to get your point across.






> Page 39 of the 2016 corporate plan reveals the latest cost ranges for FTTP and MTM.




Yes those were the costings I was referring to and I as I said when you look at what the coalition campaigned on which was 29.6 billion for the FTTN and 90 billion for the FTTP then you'll note that the difference in costings between the two plans has decreased quite substantially.  And at what point does it become more economically sensible for NBN co to build the FTTP network given it's acknowledged that it will be required in the future.


----------



## drsmith (17 September 2015)

overhang said:


> And in making that point you used Simon Hackett who doesn't support the FTTN that you support and actually still supports the FTTP, he isn't an example you should use to get your point across.



Just because I'm don't support FTTP at any cost like Labor did in government, don't translate that to supporting FTTN as the best technological solution.

The point is that it's about more than just the technology and that the costs projected under Labor were false. If I wish to use the contribution of Simon Hackett or anyone else to articulate that point, then I will. When compared to the media article you posted, his presentation from last year covers a much broader range of issues and offers a much better context of where each element fits relative to the other. 



overhang said:


> Yes those were the costings I was referring to and I as I said when you look at what the coalition campaigned on which was 29.6 billion for the FTTN and 90 billion for the FTTP then you'll note that the difference in costings between the two plans has decreased quite substantially.  And at what point does it become more economically sensible for NBN co to build the FTTP network given it's acknowledged that it will be required in the future.



That $90m FTTP estimate as you would remember was a worst case scenario which, interestingly, in dollar terms we now seem to be approaching as the latest cost estimate for FTTP has also been revised up. 

What doesn't make sense is to throw whatever it takes at FTTP as an end in itself as Labor tried to do.


----------



## So_Cynical (17 September 2015)

overhang said:


> You're using him to push a point on FTTN when he doesn't support FTTN and never has.  He believes that FTTP should be used in conjunction with HFC networks where possible.




Bill Morrow recently gave a speech at the National Press Club, i happened to watch it.

http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/national-press-club-address (start at 35.10)

Points raised - FTTN roll-out imminent, if you are within 400 meters of the Node you will get speeds up to 100 Gbit/s, out to 700 meters and your speed drops by half, this will cover 4.5 million homes, 2.2 million homes getting shafted with the slower speed.

But its all good because 90% of all current NBN connections are of 25/5Mbps or less, so its the old Telstra line of "why do you need faster speeds" and even if every one is limited to 25/5Mbps its still way faster than the DSL you have now.


----------



## galumay (17 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> What doesn't make sense is to throw whatever it takes at FTTP as an end in itself as Labor tried to do.




Thats debatable, FTTP is the right solution, most in the industry share that view, including Hackett. I guess from your side of the political fence you see that as a cost too high for an oucome. I think that those of us on the other side who have an interest and knowledge of the subject, saw it as one of those nation building infrastructure projects that are worth building even though the cost seems high from the perspective of the present.

There was an advantage in infrastructure spending in a part of the economic cycle where debt was very cheap, unfortunately the obsession with returning to surpluses over rode a more mature, long term economic view.

What Turdbull has straddled us with is not one thing or the other, its cost a lot but its not future proof - we will have to invest more in the future to bring the NBN up to speed, so to speak. I guess he was partly bound by a party that obviously were largely luddites and really dont have a clue about IT and Tech in general - but given the promotion of him as being some sort of tech savvy guy, its still a poor outcome from his time in the ministry.

Of course there are other structural problems with the NBN, such as the ACCC's stupid decision on the number of POI's for the NBN, but the blame doenst lie with government for those.

I was of course joking when i said maybe Hockey wouldnt be worse than Turnbull, he would be utterly out of his depth and I shudder to think what might be the result! Then again he couldnt do a much worse job than Conroy for most of his time in the role!!


----------



## overhang (17 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> Just because I'm don't support FTTP at any cost like Labor did in government, don't translate that to supporting FTTN as the best technological solution.




Out of curiosity do you support any sort of NBN or would you prefer we leave it to the private sector or leave it until we absolutely need it?  Is it a case of you supporting the option that requires the least capital outlay?


So_Cynical said:


> Bill Morrow recently gave a speech at the National Press Club, i happened to watch it.
> 
> http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/national-press-club-address (start at 35.10)
> 
> ...




I'll check it out thanks,  is that stat though based on people connected to wireless NBN who only have 25/5 as an option?   My father actually connected the wireless NBN last night and received 15 mbps down on the first test and then 9 on the next test, it will be adequate for his needs though.


----------



## sydboy007 (17 September 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> Bill Morrow recently gave a speech at the National Press Club, i happened to watch it.
> 
> http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/national-press-club-address (start at 35.10)
> 
> ...




Curious. I don't believe that 90% of NBN customers are on 25 or less plans. That doesn't match what I support at work. I'd say 10-15% of customers are on 100 plans with another 15-20% on 50.  There'd be more customers on 25 plans than 12.  I'm not sure what total the nbn is for our customer base, bit it seems to be growing at a decent clip. Some POIs seen to be on monthly to semi monthly bandwidth upgrades. Can't wait till we migrate over to 10 gbs dwdm wavelengths for all POIs. Capacity upgrades will be such a simple affair then.


----------



## drsmith (17 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Thats debatable, FTTP is the right solution, most in the industry share that view, including Hackett. I guess from your side of the political fence you see that as a cost too high for an oucome. I think that those of us on the other side who have an interest and knowledge of the subject, saw it as one of those nation building infrastructure projects that are worth building even though the cost seems high from the perspective of the present.



If you wish to paint people as being in political corners on this, that's up to you. I'm not interested in going down that path.

If cost wasn't an issue then obviously it comes down to the technology (and timeframe too but that's another issue and in itself partly related to cost). The board doesn't have a bottomless pit of taxpayers money to do this. Perhaps you think it should. That's up to you.


----------



## drsmith (17 September 2015)

overhang said:


> Out of curiosity do you support any sort of NBN or would you prefer we leave it to the private sector or leave it until we absolutely need it?  Is it a case of you supporting the option that requires the least capital outlay?



The option that requires the least capital outlay is to obviously have done nothing. 

Having privatised Telstra's wholesale network, it's an interesting question as to whether the Labor government should have then down the path of effectively building a new public network from the ground up and having gone down that path, made a huge mess of it. Remember too that it was their plan B. 

Perhaps Telstra's wholesale network should have been retained by the Howard Government but sometimes when these things are done, they're more difficult to undo.


----------



## sydboy007 (17 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> If you wish to paint people as being in political corners on this, that's up to you. I'm not interested in going down that path.
> 
> If cost wasn't an issue then obviously it comes down to the technology (and timeframe too but that's another issue and in itself partly related to cost). The board doesn't have a bottomless pit of taxpayers money to do this. Perhaps you think it should. That's up to you.




http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/584696/senate-demands-release-nbn-fttp-analysis/

we might get some figures to help show whether the FTTP costs that MT provided are accurate or pumped up.  We'll also get a better understanding of how they came up with the cost for FTTN.

Will be interesting if the lack of transparency is continued or they actually provide the senate with unredacted copies of the information.  I really don't see why all this information hasn't been in the public domain.


----------



## galumay (17 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> If you wish to paint people as being in political corners on this, that's up to you. I'm not interested in going down that path.
> 
> If cost wasn't an issue then obviously it comes down to the technology (and timeframe too but that's another issue and in itself partly related to cost). The board doesn't have a bottomless pit of taxpayers money to do this. Perhaps you think it should. That's up to you.




Yes, perhaps i was being too simplistic, after all both sides of politics have made a hash of what was potentially the biggest and most improtant infrastructure project in a few generations. 

It didnt ever require a "bottomless pit of taxpayers money", but it did require some leadership and an understanding of the long term payoffs of projects like this, sadly the vision was obscured.

Regardless, given the legacy of Turnbull's time in communications - which gave us a crippled NBN and the much despised data retention laws - I dont think he gets a very high mark. 

His populism is undeniable, but whether its sustainable in the face of the pressures discussed before with extreme fundamentalist christians and super-dries all undermining him from within and the previous minister for propoganda, Murdoch and his minions sniping from the sideline is debatable. 

I hope for the good of the country he can sieze back control of the liberal party from the extremists and diminish the bias and impact of the Murdoch empire as well as moving forward with real bipartisan endevour on a wide range of fronts. Maybe he can help the ALP find their moral compass too, after their disgraceful capitulation on issues of morality such as data retention, treatement of refugees and discrimination in marriage. Probably a bit much to expect though!


----------



## SirRumpole (18 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Yes, perhaps i was being too simplistic, after all both sides of politics have made a hash of what was potentially the biggest and most improtant infrastructure project in a few generations.




Rudd & Conroy should have handed the NBN to Infrastructure Australia to design and manage instead of trying to do it themselves, and so should have Abbott. There has been too much political interference in this project from both sides.


----------



## noco (18 September 2015)

There is no doubt the change in the Liberal Party leadership has broken the little hearts of the Lug Party and whilst Turnbull is not my favorite boy, the change over to him from Abbott has done the trick...The latest poll showing the Coalition in front 51 to 49% and Turnbull 2 to 1 ahead of Shorten as preferred Prime Minister....What a difference a day makes. 

Shorten has been no match for Turnbull when it comes to question time in parliament....Turnbull has the oration, the charisma and above all has the female appeal.

What now for barnacle Bill?......Perhaps another midnight back stabbing event but this time by Tanya....I really don't think the results of the TURC will be needed to shift Billy boy off his perch....If the polls continue to go against Bill, he may be gone by Xmas 2015.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/29562764/malcolms-big-move-crushes-labor-hopes-and-hearts/


----------



## Tisme (18 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Curious. I don't believe that 90% of NBN customers are on 25 or less plans. That doesn't match what I support at work. I'd say 10-15% of customers are on 100 plans with another 15-20% on 50.  There'd be more customers on 25 plans than 12.  I'm not sure what total the nbn is for our customer base, bit it seems to be growing at a decent clip. Some POIs seen to be on monthly to semi monthly bandwidth upgrades. Can't wait till we migrate over to 10 gbs dwdm wavelengths for all POIs. Capacity upgrades will be such a simple affair then.




The few people I know on the NBN are on greenfield sites and one, my Liberal mate who dines with now past PMs is on 50 = loves it and was guilty of pushing the party line prior to the wake up.

Meanwhile I have swung three of my premises over to ADSL digital ready for NBN and seen my speed drop by 10%; go figure. The phones with internet access are nice though.


----------



## Logique (18 September 2015)

Good and decent men, no question, but...

When all the emotion dies down, perhaps a more sober assessment will prevail, as Miranda Devine says.

The future relationship of the new leadership with the PMs department will be an interesting one to watch.



> *A mess of his own making*
> Miranda Devine - 14 September 2015
> http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...ytelegraph/comments/a_mess_of_his_own_making/
> 
> ...


----------



## sydboy007 (18 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> The few people I know on the NBN are on greenfield sites and one, my Liberal mate who dines with now past PMs is on 50 = loves it and was guilty of pushing the party line prior to the wake up.
> 
> Meanwhile I have swung three of my premises over to ADSL digital ready for NBN and seen my speed drop by 10%; go figure. The phones with internet access are nice though.




Even the senator for bestiality loves it.

Will be very interesting to see how the FTTN rollout has progressed by the next election.  Won't take too many up ticks in remediation to slow things down, or the odd asbestos scare.

I can't believe that tax payers have been loaded with an unlimited asbestos liability by the govt. Telstra must be laughing all the way to the bank.


----------



## overhang (18 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> The option that requires the least capital outlay is to obviously have done nothing.
> 
> Having privatised Telstra's wholesale network, it's an interesting question as to whether the Labor government should have then down the path of effectively building a new public network from the ground up and having gone down that path, made a huge mess of it. Remember too that it was their plan B.
> 
> Perhaps Telstra's wholesale network should have been retained by the Howard Government but sometimes when these things are done, they're more difficult to undo.




Labor were forced onto their plan B after Telstra submitted a non compliant bid that didn't meet the requirements to build a network for 98% of the country and no one else had the capablity to build the network that submitted bids.

Well the real problem was that Howard didn't split Telstra when it was privatised whch would have made all these negotiations with Telstra a lot simpler now.  To his credit though at least he prevented Telstra from building a FTTN network that wouldn't have required Telstra to provide 3rd party access to competitors as Telstra had planned.


----------



## overhang (18 September 2015)

noco said:


> There is no doubt the change in the Liberal Party leadership has broken the little hearts of the Lug Party and whilst Turnbull is not my favorite boy, the change over to him from Abbott has done the trick...The latest poll showing the Coalition in front 51 to 49% and Turnbull 2 to 1 ahead of Shorten as preferred Prime Minister....What a difference a day makes.
> 
> Shorten has been no match for Turnbull when it comes to question time in parliament....Turnbull has the oration, the charisma and above all has the female appeal.
> 
> ...




So you do support Turnbull?  I ask because most the comments on Bolts blog on the day of the spill were the vast majority declaring they'd never vote for Turnbull and would even vote Labor at the next election. 

Even though I think Labor should be panicking theu probably aren't as keep in mind that both Gillard and Rudd lead Abbott straight after their successful spills. There is always a honeymoon period and it's just a question as to weather Turnbull can maintain that lead.  If Abbott does as he says and doesn't seek to bring down the government like the spiteful Rudd did then I see no reason he can't win the next election comfortably.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 September 2015)

overhang said:


> If Abbott does as he says and doesn't seek to bring down the government like the spiteful Rudd did then I see no reason he can't win the next election comfortably.




Even if Abbott himself does no white-anting, it's the Conservative Right, Bernadi et al who will.

I have a feeling that Turnbull is a figurehead who will have served his purpose if he wins the next election, after which he will be discarded by the hard Right for most probably Morrison who will bring back the dry policies like the Medicare levy, go tough on welfare, "coal is king" and no emissions abatement policies.


----------



## So_Cynical (18 September 2015)

Funny to see the Labor social media spin machine busy spamming the message that "nothing has changed" more like they desperately hope nothing has changed.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 September 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> Funny to see the Labor social media spin machine busy spamming the message that "nothing has changed" more like they desperately hope nothing has changed.




So what has changed so far, apart from the name ?

Early days yet of course, best to go to sleep and wake up in a couple of months.


----------



## noco (18 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Even if Abbott himself does no white-anting, it's the Conservative Right, Bernadi et al who will.
> 
> I have a feeling that Turnbull is a figurehead who will have served his purpose if he wins the next election, after which he will be discarded by the hard Right for most probably Morrison who will bring back the dry policies like the Medicare levy, go tough on welfare, "coal is king" and no emissions abatement policies.




Would you prefer to have back , the useless Carbon dioxide tax ( which reduced CO2 emissions), the useless mining tax, which never raised any revenue although Labor spent it before they received it or open borders to illegal immigrants to cost us another $11 billion +?

The useless cash for junkers, fuel watch, food watch, pink bats, overpriced school halls etc.etc.

Closer ties with the corrupt CFMEU unions?

Gawd help the country if the LUG party ever get back in before going back to real Labor grass roots....To become a true Labor party again they have to cut their ties to the Fabian society and corrupt unions.

Shorten is a true figure head and a puppet of the CFMEU.


----------



## So_Cynical (18 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> So what has changed so far, apart from the name ?




Of course nothing has changed - you expect change in 3 days!  the Cabinet hasn't even been sworn in.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 September 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> Of course nothing has changed - you expect change in 3 days!  the Cabinet hasn't even been sworn in.




That's why I said



> Early days yet of course, best to go to sleep and wake up in a couple of months.




Seems some people can't read more than one line without losing attention.


----------



## So_Cynical (18 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Seems some people can't read more than one line without losing attention.




Are you part of the LP social media spin team? only ask because they are also pretty touchy over on FB = equally touchy.

---------------

It's been 3 days, any policy talk of any kind is just silly.


----------



## pixel (18 September 2015)

Do we have yet another new PM? 

Twice in the same article, I find reference to a new PM named "*TURNBALL*" 
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a...2-pension-four-days-off-two-year-anniversary/


----------



## SirRumpole (18 September 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> Are you part of the LP social media spin team? only ask because they are also pretty touchy over on FB = equally touchy.




It's pretty touchy to respond to one line of a post without reading the rest.

But I'm prepared to give MT some time, even though I feel he's there until he wins the next election after which the far Right will replace him with Morrison.


----------



## galumay (18 September 2015)

noco said:


> Would you prefer to have back , the useless Carbon dioxide tax ( which reduced CO2 emissions), the useless mining tax, which never raised any revenue although Labor spent it before they received it or open borders to illegal immigrants to cost us another $11 billion +?




Happy to have the Carbon tax back, may not be the best way to deal with global warming but it was better than the LNP ostrich approach. The mining tax was a failure because the ALP failed to articulate good policy and became the victims of a very well funded and focussed attack from the Mining companies. They were then forced to modify the tax to the point where it was ineffective. Would love to see the mining tax reinstated. 

The only illegal immigrants we have are already in Australia, the vast majority Poms that have overstayed their visas. Refugees are not illegal, in fact its a basic human right protected in international law. What I and many others would like to see would be a ceasing of our illegal treatment of refugees and a removal of the "die somewhere else" policy of the LNP.




> Closer ties with the corrupt CFMEU unions?
> 
> Gawd help the country if the LUG party ever get back in before going back to real Labor grass roots....To become a true Labor party again they have to cut their ties to the Fabian society and corrupt unions.
> 
> Shorten is a true figure head and a puppet of the CFMEU.




You reeally show how ignorant you are and how poorly based your political opinions are, Shorten is an AWU man, the union that is diametrically opposed to the CMFEU. (which is just one union by the way.) You are just totally incorrect and I wonder where you developed an opion so opposite to fact.

It would also serve your rants better if you dropped the "LUG" rubbish and the silly Fabian/Socialist comments. 

As Sir RUmpole says there are serious doubts that Turnbull can do anything to rescue the LNP from its extremist elements, until that happens its unlikely the turnaround in fortunes will be anything but short lived.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 September 2015)

noco said:
			
		

> Would you prefer to have back , the useless Carbon dioxide tax ( which reduced CO2 emissions)




a. individual taxpayers were compensated for this by a tripling of the tax free threshold, kept by Abbott even after the revenue was abolished.

b. Abbott replaced the revenue from the Carbon Tax with grants of taxpayers money to polluting businesses.

    What kind of crazy economics is this when we are facing a deficit ? Delete revenue and replace by outgoings of taxpayer $.

   Absolutely crazy policy just on financial grounds even if you don't believe in climate change.


----------



## sydboy007 (19 September 2015)

noco said:


> Would you prefer to have back , the useless Carbon dioxide tax ( which reduced CO2 emissions), the useless mining tax, which never raised any revenue although Labor spent it before they received it or open borders to illegal immigrants to cost us another $11 billion +?
> 
> The useless cash for junkers, fuel watch, food watch, pink bats, overpriced school halls etc.etc.
> 
> ...




* The mining tax was poorly handled by Labor.  Much more of the Henry Financial Review should have been tabled for public consultation and Rudd should have made the case why the tax base needed to be changed.  Alas he did similar to the Abbott captain picks and received the same outcome.

* Cash for junkers  - similar to Direct Action?

* Pink bats - pretty much Direct Action to households instead of businesses

* Overpriced School Halls - similar to Abbott's losing 55c in the $ tunnel investment, though I'd argue at least a lot of schools received some useful infrastructure and it did serve to help shield the small construction companies from going under.

* How beholden is the Liberal party to the FIRE sector?  Property tycoon as treasurer.  Recent PM who liked never ending house price growth.  No RC into repeated banking scandals, but happy to target the unions.


----------



## CanOz (19 September 2015)

The liberals win the key seat....!


----------



## galumay (20 September 2015)

CanOz said:


> The liberals win the key seat....!




You would think the Turnbull effect was worth 5-6% there given that the polling prior to the coup suggested they would lose it.

Of course the problem for Mal is that now he has another loony religious extremist to deal with!


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Happy to have the Carbon tax back, may not be the best way to deal with global warming but it was better than the LNP ostrich approach. The mining tax was a failure because the ALP failed to articulate good policy and became the victims of a very well funded and focussed attack from the Mining companies. They were then forced to modify the tax to the point where it was ineffective. Would love to see the mining tax reinstated.
> 
> The only illegal immigrants we have are already in Australia, the vast majority Poms that have overstayed their visas. Refugees are not illegal, in fact its a basic human right protected in international law. What I and many others would like to see would be a ceasing of our illegal treatment of refugees and a removal of the "die somewhere else" policy of the LNP.
> 
> ...




Now lets analyses this very carefully.

Firstly it has been proven the carbon dioxide tax did nothing to reduce C02 emissions as Labor claims in comparison to the direct action policy which has been successful.....It is a well known fact carbon dioxide emissions have been reduced.

When Gillard and Rudd opened the borders 2008/2013, 50,000,( mostly Muslims) poured into the country without their IDs which they threw overboard before the Gillard's water taxi picked them up....Doesn't that make them illegal immigrants ....Further more it has cost this country over $11 billion and still counting to keep these people on welfare who in many cases cannot speak English and have no skills which could be of use to our country.

You claim I show ignorance,*" Shorten is an AWU man, the union that is diametrically opposed to the CMFEU. (which is just one union by the way.) You are just totally incorrect and I wonder where you developed an opinion so opposite to fact".*........So please explain why Bill Shorten is running with the CFMEU over the CHAFTA?...When the CFMEU shouts, Bill comes running....He is the only ALP leader who is backing the CFMEU...So if you say he is strictly an AWU man, why doesn't he cut his close ties with the CFMEU....The corrupt CFMEU will be Shorten's down fall.

I make no apology for getting up your nostril in branding your comrades as the LUG party......Labor/unions/Greens are a coalition and all sleep with each other and if you sleep with dogs, you are bound to get fleas......I will also pound the foot path until the cows come home, that the Greens and the left wing Labor are members of the Fabian society which is related to communism....These people have veered away from the true Labor values and they are doing it in a very subtle way without most people realizing it.

It is too early to judge Turnbull......time will tell and I do believe Abbott can do a lot to unite the party particularly the disgruntled ones who are real supporters of Turnbull.

Come what may, the current situation is certainly a worry for Bill Shorten and the Labor Party.


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> * The mining tax was poorly handled by Labor.  Much more of the Henry Financial Review should have been tabled for public consultation and Rudd should have made the case why the tax base needed to be changed.  Alas he did similar to the Abbott captain picks and received the same outcome.
> 
> * Cash for junkers  - similar to Direct Action?
> 
> ...




Your comparisons are totally folly and and cannot be related to each other...You are showing signs of desperation.


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

galumay said:


> You would think the Turnbull effect was worth 5-6% there given that the polling prior to the coup suggested they would lose it.
> 
> Of course the problem for Mal is that now he has another loony religious extremist to deal with!




You don't seem to want to show any reasonable analysis on the Canning bi-election....In the majority of bi-election against the incumbent government, there is normally a swing against it and given the fact that the deceased Mr.Randall had a very large personal following, an expected swing could well be expected.

I am sure Shortens was full of confidence of winning Canning and he threw all his weight behind his candidate with the usual lies and propaganda......I believe the majority of Canning voters saw through Shorten and consequently his candidate was handsomely defeated....Shorten can now go back home and lick his wounds.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 September 2015)

noco said:
			
		

> Now lets analyses this very carefully.
> 
> Firstly it has been proven the carbon dioxide tax did nothing to reduce C02 emissions as Labor claims in comparison to the direct action policy which has been successful.....It is a well known fact carbon dioxide emissions have been reduced.




Australia records biggest emissions drop in a decade as carbon tax kicks in 



> Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions dropped 1.4% in the second full year of the carbon price –* the largest recorded annual decrease in the past decade.*
> 
> Data released by the Department of the Environment (pdf) showed that emissions in the June quarter rose 0.4%. However, annual emissions to June 2014 dropped 1.4%.
> 
> ...




Why don't you do some research before spouting your propaganda noco, you are just embarrassing yourself.


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Australia records biggest emissions drop in a decade as carbon tax kicks in
> 
> 
> 
> Why don't you do some research before spouting your propaganda noco, you are just embarrassing yourself.




Ah yes, the good old COMMIE PAPER the Guardian.......Do you really believe in what they say?

The paper is full of Fabian propaganda and lies.


----------



## overhang (20 September 2015)

noco said:


> Ah yes, the good old COMMIE PAPER the Guardian.......Do you really believe in what they say?
> 
> The paper is full of Fabian propaganda and lies.




Here is one from the completely neutral unbiased news source from news corp.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-carbon-tax-take/story-e6frg6xf-1226559632995



> CARBON emissions from the electricity sector have dived in the first six months under the carbon tax, with much greater use of renewable energy and cutbacks in consumption.


----------



## galumay (20 September 2015)

noco said:


> Ah yes, the good old COMMIE PAPER the Guardian.......Do you really believe in what they say?
> 
> The paper is full of Fabian propaganda and lies.




You really would be better to stop posting and ebarrassing yourself. Do you not think its telling that there is not a single member that appears to agree with your fanciful conspiracy theories?

Once your errors of fact are stripped from your posts all that remains is your shrill name calling and petty insults.

We have tried to help you realise how incorrect you are, a recent example was my pointing out the error of thinking that Bill Shorten was a CMFEU man. You of course refused to listen to people that actually know what they are talking about and kept spewing your propoganda and fallacies. 

If you really think Hastie would have won Canning with a swing of only 6% against him with Abbott as PM you are delusional. All the polling showed that it would be borderline, with a stong chance of the ALP gaining the seat, the only thing that saved Canning from being a disaster for the LNP was Turnbull as PM. 

Noco, what you should do is take a bex, have a lie down and then try to be a bit less extremist and OTT in your view of the world, do a bit more research rather than spewing out the sort of invective that lost Tony his job and you will probably find you win a few friends and start to influence a few people.


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

galumay said:


> You really would be better to stop posting and ebarrassing yourself. Do you not think its telling that there is not a single member that appears to agree with your fanciful conspiracy theories?
> 
> Once your errors of fact are stripped from your posts all that remains is your shrill name calling and petty insults.
> 
> ...




So are you trying to deny that Bill Shorten is not a sympathizer of the CFMEU regarding the CHAFTA?....Or he is running around with these corrupt unionist.....It has been all over the news on TV and the news papers...You must be getting around with blinkers on your bleedin' eyes.

Here are some facts about the Labor Party Carbon Dioxide tax which you may care to read.

BTW, who in the hell do you think you are in demanding that I stop posting my opinion just because I do not agree with you and your socialist left comrades....You seem to forget we live in a democracy where free speech is permitted unlike in communist countries where you are restricted in what you can say and do....Once again you are of the socialist left brigade who always resort to character assassination in an attempt to shut any body up who is opposed to socialism and the Fabian ideology....If you don't like what I post then it is stiff bickies.  



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia

*Falls in carbon emissions were observed following implementation of this policy.[3] It was noted that emissions from sectors subject to the pricing mechanism were 1.0% lower[4] and nine months after the introduction of the pricing scheme, Australia's emissions of carbon dioxide from electricity generation had fallen to a 10-year low, with coal generation down 11% from 2008 to 2009.[5] However, attribution of these trends to carbon pricing have been disputed, with Frontier Economics claiming trends are largely explained by factors unrelated to the carbon tax.[6][7] Electricity demand had been falling and in 2012 was at the lowest level seen since 2006 in the National Electricity Market.[8]*

*Alternative explanations of emissions reductions

Frontier Economics said the reduction in emissions from the electricity sector in the first year of the carbon tax was 'largely explained by factors unrelated to the carbon tax'. [6][7]

The Energy Users Association of Australia (EUAA) said in June 2013 "we suggest that it cannot be said that pricing emissions has reduced emissions in stationary energy to any meaningful extent" [39]*


----------



## SirRumpole (20 September 2015)

noco said:


> Frontier Economics said the reduction in emissions from the electricity sector in the first year of the carbon tax was 'largely explained by factors unrelated to the carbon tax'. [6][7]
> 
> The Energy Users Association of Australia (EUAA) said in June 2013 "we suggest that it cannot be said that pricing emissions has reduced emissions in stationary energy to any meaningful extent" [39][/B]




No one likes to admit that a tax has done anything useful. People don't like taxes and want them removed. Saying that a tax is good is not a good way to reduce taxes even if they are good taxes.


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

In a surprise move, Joe Hockey and decided to quit politics.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 September 2015)

noco said:


> In a surprise move, Joe Hockey and decided to quit politics.




Looks like the Age of Entitlement is over for Joe


----------



## galumay (20 September 2015)

noco said:


> So are you trying to deny that Bill Shorten is not a sympathizer of the CFMEU regarding the CHAFTA?....Or he is running around with these corrupt unionist.....It has been all over the news on TV and the news papers...You must be getting around with blinkers on your bleedin' eyes.




*sigh* I think you are confused, agreeing with a specific concern of a group doenst meen you support them or agree with them in totality. Concerns about the CHAFTA are hardly something only held by the CMFEU, many diverse groups including elements of the LNP have grave concerns. The only blinkers is your blindfold to reality. Let me tell you again, Bill Shorten, the ALP and the AWU have long held antipathy towards the CMFEU.



> Here are some facts about the Labor Party Carbon Dioxide tax which you may care to read.




Really? The best you can do is Wikipedia quoting power industry lobby groups?



> BTW, who in the hell do you think you are in demanding that I stop posting my opinion just because I do not agree with you and your socialist left comrades....You seem to forget we live in a democracy where free speech is permitted unlike in communist countries where you are restricted in what you can say and do....Once again you are of the socialist left brigade who always resort to character assassination in an attempt to shut any body up who is opposed to socialism and the Fabian ideology....If you don't like what I post then it is stiff bickies.




I have no issue with you posting your opinions, what i and others challeenge is the reality that you abjectly fail to back up your opinions with rational argument. Once again you just resort to ad hominem attacks and name calling because its all you have. I wasnt trying to stop you posting, merely giving you some constuctive advice on how you might actually get taken seriously. Have a read of that paragragh above and see if you can spot the massive hypocricy.

Anyway I think this discussion has dragged on long enough, you can lead a horse to water etc etc. 

Turnbull's cabinet reshuffle looks to be another positive move in the early days of his leadership. Leaving Dutton with immigration seems odd, Pyne with science is strange but i guess he couldnt get rid of all the extremists nuts in one move. I think the cabinet will be pretty well recieved by moderate voters across the major parties.


----------



## drsmith (20 September 2015)

Malcolm Turnbull's Cabinet reshuffle: ABC's who's going where?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-20/turnbull-cabinet-reshuffle-whos-going-where/6775446

Ministry announcement speech,



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ly_MFD0Drg


----------



## Wysiwyg (20 September 2015)

All hail ----- Malcolm the Conqueror -----


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

galumay said:


> *sigh* I think you are confused, agreeing with a specific concern of a group doenst meen you support them or agree with them in totality. Concerns about the CHAFTA are hardly something only held by the CMFEU, many diverse groups including elements of the LNP have grave concerns. The only blinkers is your blindfold to reality. Let me tell you again, Bill Shorten, the ALP and the AWU have long held antipathy towards the CMFEU.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Now listen here buster I am probably old enough to be your bloody grandfather and lived a lot longer and have been through more harsh times than you have had hot dinners....I have followed politics since the mid 40's and have a hell of a lot more knowledge of the history of various political parties than the average person including your good self....I have observed over the years in particular how the Labor Party have strayed from their grass roots to a more socialistic ideology.....Their aim is central control of the media, banks, mining agriculture and manufacturing or what is left of it.......Their first exercise is to control the media and the has become evident in the ABC where there is now 41% Greens and 31% Labor on the ABC traff....Something you may not be aware of and there are a lot of people in the same mold. .

You seem rather confused in what you are saying....In one breath you are demanding I stop posting and in the next breath you say you have no issues with me posting....You state I do not back up my assertions...Perhaps you should go back over my posts and see for yourself.......You appear to be young and naive of what is going on around you and hence you are apt to make wild and incorrect statements to satisfy your own argument and seek to impress your comrades on this forum....You have a lot to learn and some day you will come to understand what is really happening around the world and in Australia.

You say there are elements in the LNP who agree with Shorten and the CFMEU...Now it is your turn to back up your statement.....Please be free to name the LNP people you refer to or is that just another wild statement on your part.


----------



## drsmith (20 September 2015)

Wysiwyg said:


> All hail ----- Malcolm the Conqueror -----



Fairfax's Peter Hartcher,



> Malcolm Turnbull stole Bill Shorten's biggest asset last week when he removed the unloved Tony Abbott. Now he has stolen the Labor leader's narrative too.
> 
> Shorten has been framing the next federal election as a contest between the past and the future.
> 
> ...




Bill won't sleep well tonight.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...hes-taken-something-else-20150920-gjqzji.html


----------



## drsmith (20 September 2015)

I didn't think it would take long for Andrew Bolt to come around after today's wake for the Abbott prime-ministership,

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...ns_cabinet_without_treading_on_too_many_toes/


----------



## banco (20 September 2015)

noco said:


> Now listen here buster I am probably old enough to be your bloody grandfather and lived a lot longer and have been through more harsh times than you have had hot dinners....I have followed politics since the mid 40's and have a hell of a lot more knowledge of the history of various political parties than the average person including your good self....I have observed over the years in particular how the Labor Party have strayed from their grass roots to a more socialistic ideology.....Their aim is central control of the media, banks, mining agriculture and manufacturing or what is left of it......




Noco who privatised the Commonwealth bank etc? At some point reality has to intrude......


----------



## drsmith (20 September 2015)

banco said:


> Noco who privatised the Commonwealth bank etc?



I was about to congratulate you on your longevity but then I realised, you may not be talking about the mid-1940's. 

Since privatising CBA, Labor has definitely strayed.


----------



## banco (20 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> Since then, they've definitely strayed.




Yes I remember well their calls for the renationalisation of industries etc. in their recent election platforms.  Thank God they didn't get elected.


----------



## galumay (20 September 2015)

noco said:


> Now listen here buster I am probably old enough to be your bloody grandfather and lived a lot longer and have been through more harsh times than you have had hot dinners....




See this is exactly what i mean, you cant back up any of your opinions with facts, so you just attack the person. 

If you are old enough to be my grandfather you are over 100 years old. Not that it has the slightest thing to do with anything.

The rest of your off topic rambling I am going to ignore because I dont think its in the interest of this thread to continue trying to get you to engage in a rational discussion.


----------



## galumay (20 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> Bill won't sleep well tonight.




I suspect Little Bill hasnt slept well for a few nights! 

The real issue for the ALP is that the issues where they might have stood for an alternative they have all too often capitulated to line up with the LNP. So the inhumane, illegal and disgraceful treatment of refugees was an obvious opportuity for leadership squandered by Little Bill and the ALP. The data retention laws were another where they were jellybacked. 

As the quoted article says Turnbull has taken their catch phrase about the future and turned it on them - its particularly clever because its not easily measurable. You could argue Turnbull's mess of the NBN suggests the future is not his strong point, but there are enough other areas where the term can be thrown around with gay abandon and its a small and moving target.

Turnbull is certainly off to a strong start, the result in Canning will do a lot to shore up the doubters, the LNP know from the polling just how much of a difference Turnbull made there. The reshuffle seems to have been well calculated and should satisfy those looking for the liberals to move back to a less extremist cabinet, it probably wont infuriate the super-drys and religious extremists either - they will feel they still have some voice.

ScoMo will be interesting to watch, can he adapt and play the game or is he a rusted on hardliner? I suspect the former and this might be the making of him.


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

banco said:


> Noco who privatised the Commonwealth bank etc? At some point reality has to intrude......




Labor privatized the Commonwealth Bank and QANTAS.


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

galumay said:


> See this is exactly what i mean, you cant back up any of your opinions with facts, so you just attack the person.
> 
> If you are old enough to be my grandfather you are over 100 years old. Not that it has the slightest thing to do with anything.
> 
> The rest of your off topic rambling I am going to ignore because I dont think its in the interest of this thread to continue trying to get you to engage in a rational discussion.




Just back up you statement that there are LNP MPs who agree with Shorten and his comrades in the CFMEU over the CHAFTA.....If you can't then you are a hypocrite.

Please tell me what opinions I have made that are not backed up and I will endeavor to clarify it for you.


----------



## drsmith (20 September 2015)

galumay said:


> I suspect Little Bill hasnt slept well for a few nights!
> 
> The real issue for the ALP is that the issues where they might have stood for an alternative they have all too often capitulated to line up with the LNP. So the inhumane, illegal and disgraceful treatment of refugees was an obvious opportuity for leadership squandered by Little Bill and the ALP. The data retention laws were another where they were jellybacked.
> 
> ...



Malcolm Turnbull in my view has done much to repair the NBN but one needs to consider that beyond the specific technologies to understand that and I think in your own comments on Labor's record, you understand that starting point. On border security, the government got it right in my view but these are both specific matters perhaps best left to their respective threads.

On the political spectrum, SM and MT I hope and expect will provide the appropriate balance as a team.


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

galumay said:


> See this is exactly what i mean, you cant back up any of your opinions with facts, so you just attack the person.
> 
> If you are old enough to be my grandfather you are over 100 years old. Not that it has the slightest thing to do with anything.
> 
> The rest of your off topic rambling I am going to ignore because I dont think its in the interest of this thread to continue trying to get you to engage in a rational discussion.




You certainly know how to dish it out but note you cannot take your own medicine.


----------



## galumay (20 September 2015)

noco said:


> You certainly know how to dish it out but note you cannot take your own medicine.




Oh the irony!


----------



## noco (20 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Oh the irony!




Hmmmmm...gotcha this time....people who live in glass house should not throw stones.


----------



## sinner (21 September 2015)

Just in case noco gets really busy, or catches the flu and can't post for a few weeks, I have created this post for you to all look at until he can get back to us for some more. Consider it a break-glass emergency mechanism, I reckon we could easily survive at least a decade on this single post.



> ABC = Greens = Labor = Unions = Commies = Fabians.
> 
> They're all out to get our freedoms and replace them with collectivist work camps where we are all forced to row around the north of Australia picking up illegal immigrants who are actually all rapists and terrorists and definitely not ideological equals of the far right of Australia when it comes to things like gay marriage, war on drugs, capital punishment, separation of church and state, etc.
> 
> I told you.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 September 2015)

noco said:


> Now listen here buster I am probably old enough to be your bloody grandfather and lived a lot longer and have been through more harsh times than you have had hot dinners....I have followed politics since the mid 40's and have a hell of a lot more knowledge of the history of various political parties than the average person including your good self....I have observed over the years in particular how the Labor Party have strayed from their grass roots to a more socialistic ideology.....Their aim is central control of the media, banks, mining agriculture and manufacturing or what is left of it.......Their first exercise is to control the media and the has become evident in the ABC where there is now 41% Greens and 31% Labor on the ABC traff....Something you may not be aware of and there are a lot of people in the same mold. .




The Labor party has actually moved so far to the Right under Hawke/Keating and Rudd/Gillard that there really isn't much difference in their positions to that of Malcolm Turnbull. Labor now has a general inclination to do as little as possible in the economy compared to what Whitlam would have done. 

 The Right of the Libs has moved further Right, and now resembles the "God is on our side" looney Right Wing of the US Republican party. If it wasn't for nutcases like Bernadi, Labor and the Libs would be almost indistinguishable.



> You seem rather confused in what you are saying....In one breath you are demanding I stop posting and in the next breath you say you have no issues with me posting....You state I do not back up my assertions...Perhaps you should go back over my posts and see for yourself.......You appear to be young and naive of what is going on around you and hence you are apt to make wild and incorrect statements to satisfy your own argument and seek to impress your comrades on this forum....You have a lot to learn and some day you will come to understand what is really happening around the world and in Australia.
> 
> You say there are elements in the LNP who agree with Shorten and the CFMEU...Now it is your turn to back up your statement.....Please be free to name the LNP people you refer to or is that just another wild statement on your part.




We don't underestimate your entertainment value, so please keep posting, but we reserve the right to point out where you are wrong.


----------



## Tink (21 September 2015)

You keep posting, noco, and don't let them silence you.

The ABC does enough of that with their censorship.


----------



## MrBurns (21 September 2015)

Tink said:


> You keep posting, noco, and don't let them silence you.
> 
> The ABC does enough of that with their censorship.




Agreed. You don't know how lucky you are in here the contributors are intelligent and incisive. Other forums are very ordinary by comparison.


----------



## noco (21 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> The Labor party has actually moved so far to the Right under Hawke/Keating and Rudd/Gillard that there really isn't much difference in their positions to that of Malcolm Turnbull. Labor now has a general inclination to do as little as possible in the economy compared to what Whitlam would have done.
> 
> The Right of the Libs has moved further Right, and now resembles the "God is on our side" looney Right Wing of the US Republican party. If it wasn't for nutcases like Bernadi, Labor and the Libs would be almost indistinguishable.
> 
> ...




Good old Rumpy to the rescue of Galumay....Can't he speak for himself?

I am still waiting for him to tell who the LNP MPs are who agree with Bill Shorten and the corrupt CFMEU over the CHAFTA..

I am still waiting for him to tell me where I have not  posted links to my opinions and statements..


----------



## SirRumpole (21 September 2015)

noco said:


> Good old Rumpy to the rescue of Galumay....Can't he speak for himself?
> 
> I am still waiting for him to tell who the LNP MPs are who agree with Bill Shorten and the corrupt CFMEU over the CHAFTA..
> 
> I am still waiting for him to tell me where I have not  posted links to my opinions and statements..




People can speak for themselves , I'm simply disagreeing with your assertion that the Labor Party are a load of commie conspirators in disguise. There is simply nothing to back up those assertions.


----------



## Tisme (21 September 2015)

MrBurns said:


> ... You don't know how lucky you are in here the contributors are intelligent and incisive. .





And demanding of respect for age it seems....some people here are fricken old ...... almost makes me want to tread carefully incase I cause a fatal conniption.

I'm picturing the gramophone snugged in the corner on a parqued stand, Bob Dyer sounding out on the Tasma wireless receiver,  the Chesterfields taking pride and place on the fruit box wood occasional table next to Dad's lounge chair, .... the PM who didn't do a servile runner to his British masters like the last one, rallying the nation to find it's own way with our new mates across the pacific.


----------



## Tisme (21 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> People can speak for themselves , I'm simply disagreeing with your assertion that the Labor Party are a load of commie conspirators in disguise. There is simply nothing to back up those assertions.




The various unions around the nation during the communist hysteria were actually very much aware of how their organisation could be used as a political power vehicle, especially after Hitler and many/most were very active in allowing them a democratic voice, but making sure they were kept in check. The DLP was an opportunistic party that played on the reds under the bed bogie, but it helped to cement the public hysteria, much to Menzies' delight I'm sure.

We still see the hypnotic effect of that era on old crones who saddle up to fractured fairytales and BS they were spoon fed by a paranoid society (one I thought disappeared during the baby boomer upheavals) .


----------



## MrBurns (21 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> And demanding of respect for age it seems....some people here are fricken old ...... almost makes me want to tread carefully incase I cause a fatal conniption.
> 
> I'm picturing the gramophone snugged in the corner on a parqued stand, Bob Dyer sounding out on the Tasma wireless receiver,  the Chesterfields taking pride and place on the fruit box wood occasional table next to Dad's lounge chair, .... the PM who didn't do a servile runner to his British masters like the last one, rallying the nation to find it's own way with our new mates across the pacific.




With any luck you might grow old as well.


----------



## Tisme (21 September 2015)

MrBurns said:


> With any luck you might grow old as well.




I might even be older than Noco for all you know.

So while I'm waiting for the last sleep, I'll continue being a hipster for women's attention


----------



## SirRumpole (21 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> We still see the hypnotic effect of that era on old crones who saddle up to fractured fairytales and BS they were spoon fed by a paranoid society (one I thought disappeared during the baby boomer upheavals) .




Bjelke Petersen played the "reds under the bed" to good effect (for him). A giant gerrymander helped too.


----------



## overhang (21 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> Malcolm Turnbull in my view has done much to repair the NBN but one needs to consider that beyond the specific technologies to understand that





I feel if you judge on the per-election promises then the coalition have failed on the NBN front.  They promised "Under the Coalition’s NBN all premises will have access to download speeds 25mbps to 100mbps by the end of 2016. The minimum speed will rise to 50mbps by the end of 2019 for 90 per cent of fixed line users. "  
They still have over 12 months to see how close they can get to having all Australians connected by 2016 but at this stage it's forecasted to be well under half.

"Our plan will cost $29.5 billion. This will ensure the NBN is cash flow positive and can operate without assistance from government."

It's now going to cost between 46 billion and 56 billion all though the money will be sourced elsewhere as the peak government funding of 29.5 billion will not be increased.  One has to wonder how they overestimated Labors plan but underestimated their own plan by so much. You can say that Labors was worst case but they never mentioned that and campaigned on the NBN costing 90 billion all election. 

Probably the worst of all was Turnbull sacking the NBN board and installing his ex-Telstra executive mates.  This was a huge conflict of interest as they were allowed to keep their Telstra shares all whilst negotiating a 11 billion dollar deal with Telstra, how we can trust they put the taxpayers interests ahead of their own as Telstra shareholders is beyond me.


----------



## overhang (21 September 2015)

I will say though it's refreshing to hear a PM that has dropped the rhetoric, he doesn't need 10 flags behind him for a press conference, isn't blaming Labor every second sentence and isn't running a fear-mongering campaign to defeat the "death-cult".  I think the only thing that could be this governments downfall will be if the right faction like Cory Bernardi seeks to undermine the government.  No doubt back at the Labor camp there will be some quiet panic because Shorten didn't bring down Abbott, he brought himself down with his incompetence.


----------



## Knobby22 (21 September 2015)

I am surprised no one is talking about the ministerial line up.

As Mark Kenny of the Age said "Turnbull has passed the first test of leadership simply by showing some."

I am very pleased with the new ministry. As Julia and I used to say, there is plenty of talent in the Libs but Abbott wouldn't let it rise preferring to keep his B grade mates such as that suckhole Kevin Andrews in power.

Finally we have some decent ministers who aren't interested in right wing ideology but rather want to achieve results for Australia. A woman Defence minister was good to see and poor old Shorten could only bleat that there isn't a separate minister for the handicapped (would should belong in the social services ministry anyway for obvious reasons).

The ministry is a good spread of younger and old, male and female, right and left; a proper Coalition ministry as what has occurred previously in history. I am now even more confident that we as a country will now make some good decisions.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 September 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> The ministry is a good spread of younger and old, male and female, right and left; a proper Coalition ministry as what has occurred previously in history. I am now even more confident that we as a country will now make some good decisions.




There is certainly room for optimism, the question is will he keep some of the current rubbish policies or go for something better , eg

* draconian meta data retention.

* stupid waste of taxpayers money in "Direct Action" on climate change

* tax perks for the rich, NG , superannuation., family trusts

* making uni degrees more expensive

* support for coal instead of renewables

* continued action in Iraq


----------



## noco (21 September 2015)

MrBurns said:


> Agreed. You don't know how lucky you are in here the contributors are intelligent and incisive. Other forums are very ordinary by comparison.




Thanks Tink and Mr.Burns for your support.....The lefties have tried to make out I had no support on the ASF and that I am some sort of a crank and a Loner with extreme opinions that are opposed to their ideology of politics and when you disagree with them they turn to their nasty side..... As you may have noted one member in particular maintains I should stop posting altogether.....Their attempt to monopolize this forum is not working and I am sure there are plenty of viewers who would agree with me.


----------



## noco (21 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> People can speak for themselves , I'm simply disagreeing with your assertion that the Labor Party are a load of commie conspirators in disguise. There is simply nothing to back up those assertions.




I have posted  this link before and I will post it again just for you.....I hope this will convince you that there is connections between the Labor Party, the Greens and the unions, as I now refer in brief as the LUG party, and the Fabian Society which is closely related to communism.

Julia Gillard, Chris Bowen, Tony Burke and Jenny Macklin are just a few who come to mind who are dedicated Fabians....The late Gough Whitlam was their Patron....The Fabians logo is "A SHEEP IN WOLVES CLOTHING" and that speaks for itself.

*Today, the society functions primarily as a think tank and is one of 15 socialist societies affiliated with the Labor Party. Similar societies exist in Australia (the Australian Fabian Society), Canada (the Douglas-Coldwell Foundation and the now disbanded League for Social Reconstruction) and in New Zealand.*

*Ever since Gough Whitlam took power, we have seen the Fabian fingerprint on everything successive Labor governments have done. It’s not just that they spend all the money so carefully built up by their opponents the LNP or its predecessors whenever they are in power. The Laborites have made sweeping changes to the social fabric of our country, whittled away little by little at our freedoms, and pushed us ever closer to the communist ideal of collectivism.

As well, we have been disarmed, a key element in the Fabian agenda. An unarmed citizenry is unable to face the overwhelming force at the disposal of a Fabian-led government. So far, they have not had to implement force against us. Over the decades they have perfected ways to strip our rights and subjugate us, until we have a population so used to being told how to behave and what to do that our citizens willingly accept the impositions a free people would never submit to.

Julia Gillard and her comrades have done everything precisely by the Fabian book. They have got into the corridors of power using honeyed words and big promises, as well as knifing their only obstacle in the back.Once in power they have ruthlessly, but quietly, gone about imposing their socialist aims on a population powerless to act against them. We have been disarmed. We have no way to determine how we are governed. The Fabianists dictate what laws we are ruled by. We are spied on (cameras everywhere today). The press, that pillar of our social fabric, has let us down and succumbed to the bullying politicians. Instead of standing up for the rights of the common man, they have surrendered their power to those in power. They have left We the People totally exposed to the depredations of the wolves in sheep’s clothing.

I have no doubt Bill Shorten will follow suit if he ever gets back into power as it is in his DNA.

*
http://www.restoreaustralia.org.au/fabians-and-pm-gillard/


----------



## SirRumpole (21 September 2015)

noco said:


> I have posted  this link before and I will post it again just for you.....I hope this will convince you that there is connections between the Labor Party, the Greens and the unions, as I now refer in brief as the LUG party, and the Fabian Society which is closely related to communism.
> 
> Julia Gillard, Chris Bowen, Tony Burke and Jenny Macklin are just a few who come to mind who are dedicated Fabians....The late Gough Whitlam was their Patron....The Fabians logo is "A SHEEP IN WOLVES CLOTHING" and that speaks for itself.
> 
> ...





<yawn>

The only "socialist" policy that Macklin and Gillard introduced was the NDIS which your now fearless leader took credit for last week, and which our most Right Wing Prime Minister Tony Abbott also supported.


----------



## sinner (21 September 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> I am surprised no one is talking about the ministerial line up.




ha funny you should mention it because all I could think after reading was that if the new bloke who claims to want to treat the electorate with intelligence puts Sinodinos in the position of cabinet secretary after fronting ICAC, there isn't too much to be said.


----------



## noco (21 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> <yawn>
> 
> The only "socialist" policy that Macklin and Gillard introduced was the NDIS which your now fearless leader took credit for last week, and which our most Right Wing Prime Minister Tony Abbott also supported.




Is that the best you can do is yawn.......Wake up Rumpy as to what is really happening in the LUG party...get them back to the grass roots of a true Labor party.

The Labor Party funded the NDIS with money they did not get from Swan's failed mining tax....Labor committed money they did not have....The Labor Party had no idea how to fund it just like lots of other hare brain schemes like their renewable energy target of 50% by 2050 or was it 2030?...Labor once again had not costed it and furthermore have no idea how.

Abbott was wedged into supporting the unfunded NDIS ...If he had not supported it,  he would have been branded heartless....It is now a rope around the neck of the tax payers and will cost extensively more as time goes on.


----------



## Knobby22 (21 September 2015)

sinner said:


> ha funny you should mention it because all I could think after reading was that if the new bloke who claims to want to treat the electorate with intelligence puts Sinodinos in the position of cabinet secretary after fronting ICAC, there isn't too much to be said.




I know he is held in a lot of respect within the party but a comeback like that is surprising.

I am also surprised that Bill Shorten is still opposition leader after his Royal Commission fronting where some in the Labor party said he should immediately resign..  so what do I know?


----------



## sinner (21 September 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> I know he is held in a lot of respect within the party but a comeback like that is surprising.
> 
> I am also surprised that Bill Shorten is still opposition leader after his Royal Commission fronting where some in the Labor party said he should immediately resign..  so what do I know?




Come on Knobby, stuff like this is only surprising for the naive. Be a bit more cynical about politics and you will find yourself a lot less surprised about most things.


----------



## McLovin (21 September 2015)

noco said:


> I have posted  this link before and I will post it again just for you.....I hope this will convince you that there is connections between the Labor Party, the Greens and the unions, as I now refer in brief as the LUG party, and the Fabian Society which is closely related to communism.
> 
> Julia Gillard, Chris Bowen, Tony Burke and Jenny Macklin are just a few who come to mind who are dedicated Fabians....The late Gough Whitlam was their Patron....The Fabians logo is "A SHEEP IN WOLVES CLOTHING" and that speaks for itself.
> 
> ...




FFS, you've got to be kidding? How about some non-partisan "evidence" instead of this self-serving rubbish?

From your link (I was going to call it an article, but that would be too kind)



> Over the past 120 years, Fabian Society members have been almost singularly responsible for creating Communism in Soviet Russia and Communist China, Fascism in Italy and Germany, and socialism generally throughout the world.




Bahahahahahahaahaha....Evidence?



> The Fabianists believe in achieving their aims by stealth. They were opposed to the violent revolutions in Russia and China. Instead, they prefer to infiltrate into positions of power and then go about implementing their socialist agenda step by step. They operate so stealthily and operate so slowly, chipping away at the very fabric of society little by little, that most people don’t even notice they have lost their freedom until it is too late. At the same time, the Fabianists are extremely skilled at manipulating public opinion using emotive causes that sound so attractive that most people miss the sinister purpose behind them.




Ahhhhhh...Of course! No evidence because they do it by stealth! Curse those conniving Commies!

But wait, it gets even better!



> Every UK Labor Prime Minister, from Ramsay MacDonald to Tony Blair, and Gordon Brown, has been a member of the Society. Today, well over 200 parliamentarians are members and the Fabian Society continues to be at the heart of the Labor movement.
> 
> There is no real difference between Fabianism and Leninist Communism. Both their goals are to impose collectivism. Communism sought to impose collectivism using overwhelming force. We have seen how that failed.




Tony Blair, the old Leninist. I'd love you to name a single Leninist policy of Blair's government.

Honestly who writes this cr@p?


----------



## sinner (21 September 2015)

McLovin said:


> FFS, you've got to be kidding? How about some non-partisan "evidence" instead of this self-serving rubbish?




The hilarious thing for me is that I ran across this site last night after googling "communist fabian green" last night looking for stuff to poke fun at the nocobot with, and dismissed it as too crazy, even for the nocobot. 

I like how down the bottom they have a whole chunk about how Gillard is the evil privatiser, and privatisation is according to them part of the Fabian agenda.



> Honestly who writes this cr@p?




Nominally? This guy:


```
Registrant:                      FOUNDATION FOR NATIONAL RENEWAL
Registrant ID:                   ABN 67078967960
Eligibility Type:                Other

Registrant Contact ID:           R-001382007-SN
Registrant Contact Name:         Mike Holt
```

Who also runs other awesome sites such as: islam4infidels.com ...lol.

But let's be realistic, it's unlikely that this is merely some guy. Usually these sorts of things are propaganda fronts for other parts of the right wing establishment which must remain appearing respectable.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 September 2015)

noco's tin hat article said:
			
		

> As well, we have been disarmed, a key element in the Fabian agenda.




Remind me again who introduced gun laws into Australia ?

Answer: That noted Fabian John Howard, and it was one of the best things he did.


----------



## McLovin (21 September 2015)

sinner said:


> Who also runs other awesome sites such as: islam4infidels.com ...lol.




Sounds educational. 



sinner said:


> The hilarious thing for me is that I ran across this site last night after googling "communist fabian green" last night looking for stuff to poke fun at the nocobot with, and dismissed it as too crazy, even for the nocobot.




Lol...Have you read the comments? There is some genuine intellectual prowess on display. I get the feeling the people who read this stuff define a Fabian as someone who you blame for **** that is wrong in your life. 

Diane Hanson (unfortunate surname given the subject) is a case in point...



> We must give the people of Australia the power to tell the Governmnent what we want I work many years now and now waht do I get dearer power , petrol shopping is getting dearer so soon I wont be able to buy any thing we need to have our own milk producers back our farms back our own manfacturing back in Australia so our Grand Children will be able to get work we need more housing so we dont have people homeless we need Public Housing for all low income earners not just Centrelink people we need to have the sick looked after in the right places not for the man on the street to look after them the Governments have let us down so I say lets change the Consititution Power to the People / by the People /and for the People




The Fabians have also stolen Diane's full stop button.

Pubilc housing for people on low incomes sounds awfully Fabian to me.

But for mine, Barry Revett nails it...



> Great Work keep it up the problem in Australia is Apathy ,we are so far from the rest of the World ,not many People believe ,that the Fabian Society Exists ,She Will Be Right ,BUTfor how long ,until an Arab comes to your Door and tells You that he owns the house ,because our Govt Borrowed Against it.We have to get that message out that it is Your House at risk and Your Freedom at risk.




Damn arabs.


----------



## pixel (21 September 2015)

Did anyone listen to Kevin Andrews' tirade last night? when he hinted at the "silent majority" being on his side?
He clearly proved the point that, to an ultra-right "fringe dweller", any slightly more rational opinion appears as a radical leftist position that has to be eradicated.

NB: A lunatic fringe exists at both ends of the political spectrum.


----------



## Tisme (21 September 2015)

pixel said:


> Did anyone listen to Kevin Andrews' tirade last night? when he hinted at the "silent majority" being on his side?
> He clearly proved the point that, to an ultra-right "fringe dweller", any slightly more rational opinion appears as a radical leftist position that has to be eradicated.
> 
> NB: A lunatic fringe exists at both ends of the political spectrum.




He's not alone it seems:






> One of the first words Malcolm Turnbull heard after being named Australia's 29th Prime Minister on Monday night was a four-letter expletive, not fit for publication, hurled by one of Tony Abbott's junior staffers.
> 
> The story of Richard Dowdy's spill night insult has already become legend in Coalition staffer circles.
> 
> ...




http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/austr...nbull-with-a-four-letter-expletive/ar-AAerhLN


----------



## noco (21 September 2015)

McLovin said:


> FFS, you've got to be kidding? How about some non-partisan "evidence" instead of this self-serving rubbish?
> 
> From your link (I was going to call it an article, but that would be too kind)
> 
> ...




Oh dear, even when I post a link aligning the Labor Party with the Fabian Society (communism) you still don't won't to accept it and instead you call it crap....You are either so naive or you just cannot accept the fact that the LUG party are closely associated with the Fabians.....Shhhhhh.....lets keep it a secret...Don't tell anybody...we don't really want people to know who we really are....All your comrades in the Green Party are all Fabians.....Lee Rhianna is a confessed communist.

If the Lug party renamed themselves the Communist Party, how long do you think they would last?...So they do it very subtly without the naive knowing it......they just keep chipping away bit by bit......They are not in a hurry to reach their goal.  

And BTW where is the Labour Party in England now?


----------



## McLovin (21 September 2015)

noco said:


> Oh dear, even when I post a link aligning the Labor Party with the Fabian Society (communism) you still don't won't to accept it and instead you call it crap....You are either so naive or you just cannot accept the fact that the LUG party are closely associated with the Fabians.....Shhhhhh.....lets keep it a secret...Don't tell anybody...we don't really want people to know who we really are....All your comrades in the Green Party are all Fabians.....Lee Rhianna is a confessed communist.
> 
> If the Lug party renamed themselves the Communist Party, how long do you think they would last?...So they do it very subtly without the naive knowing it......they just keep chipping away bit by bit......They are not in a hurry to reach their goal.
> 
> And BTW where is the Labour Party in England now?




Thanks for the laugh, loco. Whoops, I mean noco.


----------



## noco (21 September 2015)

McLovin said:


> Thanks for the laugh, loco. Whoops, I mean noco.




The laugh is on you buddy not me......Perhaps you should rename yourself McJokin.


----------



## Tisme (21 September 2015)

pixel said:


> Did anyone listen to Kevin Andrews' tirade last night? when he hinted at the "silent majority" being on his side?
> He clearly proved the point that, to an ultra-right "fringe dweller", any slightly more rational opinion appears as a radical leftist position that has to be eradicated.
> 
> NB: A lunatic fringe exists at both ends of the political spectrum.




I should have also pointed out that it seems very strange that a man who supported the blockade of the ABC would resort to wasting taxpayer monies on the very same channel, looking for support, when everyone knows the station and its viewers are a cesspool of communists and fabians. 

He would be much better addressing the nation on a neutral broadcaster's time, say Telstra/Foxtel .... you've never seen either of those companies and their directors benefit from political alliances.


----------



## McLovin (21 September 2015)

pixel said:


> Did anyone listen to Kevin Andrews' tirade last night? when he hinted at the "silent majority" being on his side?
> He clearly proved the point that, to an ultra-right "fringe dweller", any slightly more rational opinion appears as a radical leftist position that has to be eradicated.
> 
> NB: A lunatic fringe exists at both ends of the political spectrum.




Yes. Totally. But I'm fairly certain the right of the Liberal Party have yet to realise how unpopular Abbott was. Actually I think Abbott has yet to realise just how unpopular he was. The problem is that fools like Cory Bernardi are given oxygen by the media and so they start to believe that their views are mainstream when they are far from it.


----------



## sinner (21 September 2015)

noco said:


> Oh dear, even when I post a link aligning the Labor Party with the Fabian Society (communism) you still don't won't to accept it and instead you call it crap....




I guess it's difficult for some old people to realise this, but even a 12 year old could produce a website like that claiming anything. Actually a 12 year old would probably produce a slicker product.

I could setup a website called nocoscrewedaustralia.org.au that claims that the nocobot is responsible for all of our collective woes and it would cost me less than $50 to keep it running for a year. Does that make it true?

Posting links to random internet bull**** does not constitute evidence of anything except technical illiteracy or sheer naivete.


----------



## galumay (21 September 2015)

Noco, do your self a favour and read back thru the last couple of pages and engage in some serious self reflection. 

You are drowning mate, posting crazy, extremist, conspiracy theory websites as some sort of evidence for opinions that are so far out of step with reality. 

Everyone is trying to help you see how delusional a lot of this stuff you post is, and many of them are NOT supporters of the ALP, they are LNP supporters, but they too are trying to tell you that this constant shrill name calling and ad hominem attacks do nothing except alienate you. 

The whole "reds under the bed" nonsense died out long ago. 

One thing I learnt long ago in life is that if your views on something are really on the very extremity of of the bell curve, then you are probably due for some self reflection and genuine critical analysis of the views. If the sources for your information are also extremely biased towards the extremist end of the spectrum then you also need to look for more reliable sources, otherwise you are just going to be a victim of confirmation bias.

I say that as having been a full blown, bolted on, card carrying member of the Communist Party when it was actually a thing. (was refused a visa to the USA many years ago because of it!). I have also spent time in Cuba which blew away any last vestiges of belief in Communism as a viable political option. 

It was the realisation that I was just as extremist, biased, polarised and paranoid as the right ring nut job extremists that I saw as the mortal enemy - we were one and the same, the extremities actually just come around and right and left meet in fascism.

Thats why I persist in bothering with trying to get you to see how irrational and delusional your opinions are, because I have been exactly like you when i was younger. 

I think it was Bertrand Russell who said if you are not a communist before you are 30 then you have no heart, but if you are a communist after you are 30 you have no head! While that resonates with me, maybe there is a broader concept that holding extreme, polarised views based on an absolute or black and white view of the world is all very well when you are young and eager, but its not a good looker as you mature and become more experienced as a person!


----------



## noco (21 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Noco, do your self a favour and read back thru the last couple of pages and engage in some serious self reflection.
> 
> You are drowning mate, posting crazy, extremist, conspiracy theory websites as some sort of evidence for opinions that are so far out of step with reality.
> 
> ...




You certainly did not research very far did you?

It took me just one minute for the link below and I will send you more progressively.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Fabian_Society

*The Australian Fabians have historically had close ties with the Australian Labor Party, also known as the ALP. This is evidenced by the number of past ALP prime ministers, federal ministers and state premiers who were active members of the Australian Fabians while in office. The role of patron of the Australian Fabians is currently vacant, but ceremonially filled by former Australian prime minister, the late Gough Whitlam.[3] This is a temporary arrangement and the position will be filled when an appropriate person to fund and uphold the society's values is found.

The Australian Fabians have had a significant influence on public policy development in Australia since the Second World War,[citation needed] with many of its members having held influential political offices in Australian governments.[citation needed]*

Notable members of the Fabian Society.

Notable members
	This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2011)

*Gough Whitlam (ALP Prime Minister 1972–75)
    Bob Hawke (ALP Prime Minister 1983–1991)
    Paul Keating (ALP Prime Minister 1991–1996)
    John Cain (ALP Premier of Victoria)
    Jim Cairns (ALP Deputy Prime Minister)
    Don Dunstan (ALP Premier of South Australia)
    Geoff Gallop (ALP Premier of Western Australia)
    Neville Wran (ALP Premier of NSW 1976–86)
    Frank Crean (ALP Deputy Prime Minister)
    Arthur Calwell (ALP Former Leader)
    Race Mathews (ALP MHR and Victorian MLA)
    John Faulkner (ALP Senator and National President)
    Julia Gillard (ALP Australia's first female Prime Minister)
    John Lenders (ALP Treasurer of Victoria)
    Clarrie Martin (ALP Attorney General of New South Wales)
    Tanya Plibersek (Federal member for Sydney (ALP) 1998 - )
    Henry Hyde Champion (Journalist)
    Nettie Palmer (Writer)
    Charles Strong (Clergyman)
    Charles Marson (Clergyman)
    David Charleston (Trade Unionist)
    Bernard O'Dowd (Writer)
    Phillip Adams (Broadcaster)
*


https://www.laborherald.com.au/politics/8-things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-fabians/

*6. Some of your favourite Labor identities are Fabians

Did you know that four of the last five Labor Prime Ministers were Fabians? Or that state Premiers like Geoff Gallop, John Cain and Don Dunstan were also Fabians?

We count amongst our members Tanya Plibersek, Chris Bowen, Jenny McAllister, Tim Watts, Stephen Jones, Wayne Swan, Andrew Leigh, Julie Collins, Claire Moore Luke Foley and many more.*

*1. The Fabian motto is ‘educate, agitate and organise’

Radical Irish playwright George Bernard Shaw helped found the Fabians and famously described the Fabian mission as “educate, agitate, organise”.*


----------



## SirRumpole (21 September 2015)

Some of the finest minds in our history in that list, we should be proud.

 To think that they committed the horrendous crime of wanting a more equitable society, unlike your mates on the looney far Right and the IPA who just want corporate power.

 I know what I prefer , any day of the week.


----------



## McLovin (21 September 2015)

noco said:


> You certainly did not research very far did you?
> 
> It took me just one minute for the link below and I will send you more progressively.
> 
> ...




You just don't get it do you, noco? No one disputes those people are members of the Fabian Society, it's the premise that Fabians are all communists or it's some sort of secret free masonesque society. Paul Keating a communist?


----------



## Tisme (21 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Some of the finest minds in our history in that list, we should be proud.
> 
> .




You can add all those others like,  Benjamin Disraeli, Charles Darwin (oh the irony), Ralph Waldo Emerson, William Gladstone, George Bernard Shaw, Oscar Wilde, etc


----------



## galumay (21 September 2015)

noco said:


> You certainly did not research very far did you?




Did you bother reading what I wrote to try and help you?

If so why did you then link to a wikipedia page about Fabians in Australia? 

It seems entirely counter to your use of it as a derogatory term, "fabian" is not an insult! 

It's simply a group of people that share similar basic human values and morals, again if you had researched further than relying on Wikipedia you might have see the great minds of history that have been members of the fabian society. 

You contiue shrill out 'fabian' as if it is some powerful insult. 

Its a logical fallacy to suggest because someone is a member of the ALP and a member of the Fabian Society, then they are a Communist, because some Fabian Society members may possibly be Communists.

Its also a logical fallacy to suggest that because some ALP members are also Fabian Society Members and maybe some Fabian Members are Communists - that there is some conspiracy to overthrow Australia's political system by the wicked communists you imagine are controlling the ALP!


----------



## noco (21 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Did you bother reading what I wrote to try and help you?
> 
> If so why did you then link to a wikipedia page about Fabians in Australia?
> 
> ...




So you want to help me???????........My gawd.....What a lot of gobbledygook...I don't need your help...I am old enough and mature enough to think for myself thanks.....You are the one that needs help.

Wake up sonny......You just won't come to terms in the way the Labor Party is heading.......Their membership has dropped from 370,000 to 50,000 and will face distinction if they continue on their present path.



Wake up sonny, the Fabian society is the think tank for the LUG party......The LUG party try to disguise it as democratic socilaism


----------



## galumay (21 September 2015)

noco said:


> ...I don't need your help...




Well if you dont want my help thats fine, although after that last spray I suspect I misread the problem! 

It may be medical help you need, perhaps its dementia or senility that is causing your delusional paranoia and wackjob conspiracy theories?

I am going to leave you to prep for the communist holocoust that is secretly been hatched by a squad of fabians after infiltrating the ALP and turning it into the FUG, intent of destroying civilisation as we know it!

I have done my best to try to help you to see why no one here takes you seriously and to encourage you to engage in some genuine self reflection about what you have been posting. From your responses I doubt you even read it, or bothered to go back and read what you have been posting and genuinely consider some of the many points various posters here have made rebutting your thinking.

I think we can safely say its a lost cause, and I shall add the first entry ever in my ignore list - usually I am very happy to discuss issues with those who have come to differing views to my own, but there needs to be some level of intellectual engagement or its just wasting my time and everyone else on the forum who has to read the ongoing drivel. Enough is enough!!

Sorry to all those who have tired before me of this debate, please return to normal broadcasting!

I see that the first polls are in showing a swing of +12% to the LNP since Turnbull took over. I think Little Bill has another sleepless night ahead!


----------



## sptrawler (21 September 2015)

galumay said:


> I see that the first polls are in showing a swing of +12% to the LNP since Turnbull took over. I think Little Bill has another sleepless night ahead!




Well I think it was mentioned years ago, that Labor were making it all about Abbott, rather than the Coalition.

Now that Abbott has gone, Labor are left with a vacuum, now what.

Labor made it appear, the only problem with the Coalition was Abbott. 

Dumb politics.IMO


----------



## noco (21 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Well if you dont want my help thats fine, although after that last spray I suspect I misread the problem!
> 
> It may be medical help you need, perhaps its dementia or senility that is causing your delusional paranoia and wackjob conspiracy theories?
> 
> ...




 Man oh Man you are getting desperate aren't you to make these personal attacks on my mentality just goes to show how sick you are...For a person who likes his own way and God help those who disagree with you,you could not  get any lower.....you are disgusting and I do hope Joe Blow pulls you into line for such a vicious attack.


----------



## galumay (21 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Well I think it was mentioned years ago, that Labor were making it all about Abbott, rather than the Coalition.
> 
> Now that Abbott has gone, Labor are left with a vacuum, now what.
> 
> ...




I guess there is an element of truth to that, although it would be hard for them to do otherwise, Abbott was a gift to the ALP as a PM. 

I think thats why Little Bill did and said so little in the last 12 months, it was obvious Abbott would never be able to win another election so the ALP didnt want him to lose the leadership before the election.

In a way Labor turned out to be correct in their campaigning - it was all about Abbott, just that at the last election not quite enough of the voters believed them!

It certainly makes Labor's job in opposition harder, Turnbull is much more likeable and being more moderate will placate a lot of voters disturbed by the extremism of Abbott. 

I suspect what Labor will have to do is wait a bit firstly and see whether the change in leader actually translates into better government or not. 

If not then the honeymoon will quickly turnaround, if so then Labor will need to redefine itself, start to stand up for some issues that they have been morally bankrupt on and I dont believe they can do that with Little Bill at the helm.

Turnbull has a great opportunity to drag the Liberal Party back to its true values and regain control from the extremists. He has a chance to actually create what Tony promised and could never deliver - good government.

I wish him the best of luck!


----------



## SirRumpole (21 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Labor made it appear, the only problem with the Coalition was Abbott.




The government's problem in the main was and still is their policies. If they don't change all the flowery talk from Turnbull means nothing.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 September 2015)

noco said:


> Man oh Man you are getting desperate aren't you to make these personal attacks on my mentality just goes to show how sick you are...For a person who likes his own way and God help those who disagree with you,you could not  get any lower.....you are disgusting and I do hope Joe Blow pulls you into line for such a vicious attack.




Given that two of the people on your Fabian list (Hawke and Keating) did more to open up Australia to international competition (whatever we may think of whether that was good for us or not) than any of your Liberal heroes who were more apt to lean to protectionism, indicates that your thinking regarding an underlying communist conspiracy is (to be kind) not exactly rational.

So, the advice to settle down a bit is probably in your own interest, given your recent medical problem. We don't want you blowing a pressure valve do we ?


----------



## noco (22 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Given that two of the people on your Fabian list (Hawke and Keating) did more to open up Australia to international competition (whatever we may think of whether that was good for us or not) than any of your Liberal heroes who were more apt to lean to protectionism, indicates that your thinking regarding an underlying communist conspiracy is (to be kind) not exactly rational.
> 
> So, the advice to settle down a bit is probably in your own interest, given your recent medical problem. We don't want you blowing a pressure valve do we ?




Rumpy, I am now feeling 10 years younger since my procedure and all has gone well.

You mentioned Hawke and Keating being members of the Fabians and I do agree Hawke was closer to the ground roots of the Labor movement than is the current Labor Party now in opposition....The opposition led by Bill Shorten has veered too far to the left, are too closely associated with corrupt unions  and may well be interpreting the Fabian rules to the extreme  which may be their undoing...I mentioned extreme as I relate in comparison  to the Islamic movement where  some elements interpret the Koran one way and others to a different way.....I do hope you understand my drift....There are also different forms of socialism and some can be very disturbing.

You could also make a comparison between Hawke and Whitlam, where Whitlam wanted to buy back the farm with his outrageous dealing to borrow $billions from A fellow named Clemlani...Whitlam was certainly heading for central control...Hawke was far more moderate and did bring in some good reforms....I read a speech bu Chris Bowen and I regard Bowen as more in the mold of Whitlam..... 

My concern is the current Labor party are moving too far to the left which embraces central control....Central control by the state of all our resources....Can you really imagine how the state could manage our mines when they had trouble running the pink bats and the NBN...It will not work.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 September 2015)

noco said:


> Rumpy, I am now feeling 10 years younger since my procedure and all has gone well.




Good to hear that





> My concern is the current Labor party are moving too far to the left which embraces central control....Central control by the state of all our resources....Can you really imagine how the state could manage our mines when they had trouble running the pink bats and the NBN...It will not work.




I can't really see any evidence of that. What makes you think they are moving to "central control" of resources ?

The resources belong to you and me anyway, we own them and we just sell mining companies the right to extract and sell the resources. The price we charge to allow them to do that should be at the discretion of our representatives.


----------



## Tisme (22 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> The resources belong to you and me anyway, we own them and we just sell mining companies the right to extract and sell the resources. The price we charge to allow them to do that should be at the discretion of our representatives.




Yes if we didn't want central control, we should just open the boarders and let anyone in or out to do whatever they want to do.

Obviously those idiots back in the day didn't think about how unionising the states into a federation would result in forming government to govern......


----------



## Logique (22 September 2015)

galumay said:


> ..Turnbull has a great opportunity to drag the Liberal Party back to its true values and regain control from the extremists. He has a chance to actually create what Tony promised and could never deliver - good government.
> I wish him the best of luck!



If you define an increase in the GST to 15% as good government, then I suppose so.

I don't know if the Coalition will be game to run on it at the next election, but if returned, 15% GST with probable widening of the base, is all but guaranteed. As would be a reduction in the top marginal tax rate.

As for the big end of town paying a fair share - Turnbull just sacked the Small Business Minister, Bruce Billson, one of the best performers in the Cabinet.  So it's happy days for big business.

Labor's best chance is to run against the GST increase (and to replace the leader).


----------



## basilio (22 September 2015)

So exactly how long will this turncoat, free thinking, socialist sympathiser last as leader of the Liberal Party ?  I think (I'm certain...!) I can see a deeeep, dastardly plot in the offing.

Scenario 1

Malcolm Turnball is allowed to win the next election - probably in a landslide - and also gain control of the Senate. In fact an election is called a bit earlier in March next year to avoid another budget. A few weeks after the election one way or another Malcolm falls under a bus. Could be literal. Could be an accident. Could be some created scandal. Plenty of guys in the shadows who excel at such pursuits. 

Of course there has to be sweep  of Malcolm fellow travellers as well. Women back to the kitchen etc

Scenario 2

Noco help me out here please. I'm running out of suitably imaginative ways to expose Malcolm as a doctrinaire Comintern  Fabian who .............


----------



## McLovin (22 September 2015)

Logique said:


> If you define an increase in the GST to 15% as good government, then I suppose so.
> 
> I don't know if the Coalition will be game to run on it at the next election, but if returned, 15% GST with probable widening of the base, is all but guaranteed. As would be a reduction in the top marginal tax rate.
> 
> ...




If the only change is an increase in the GST and a reduction in the top marginal rate then I will be very disappointed. The tax system worked a generation ago, wholesale reform is needed. I'd be really happy to see some sort of pooled development fund brought back for STEM investments especially around renewables, but I know I'm dreaming!


----------



## SirRumpole (22 September 2015)

Logique said:


> If you define an increase in the GST to 15% as good government, then I suppose so.
> 
> I don't know if the Coalition will be game to run on it at the next election, but if returned, 15% GST with probable widening of the base, is all but guaranteed. As would be a reduction in the top marginal tax rate.
> 
> ...




If the Libs try an impose and increased or widened GST on the voters without fixing the top end perks and tax rorts, then they are dead meat imo.


----------



## Logique (22 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> If the Libs try an impose and increased or widened GST on the voters without fixing the top end perks and tax rorts, then they are dead meat imo.



Right there with you on that!


----------



## basilio (22 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> If the Libs try an impose and increased or widened GST on the voters without fixing the top end perks and tax rorts, then they are dead meat imo.




It will be interesting to see what happens. If one was trying to create a fairer, equitable broad based tax system you would look at international companies getting away with overseas tax havens, the rorting of super by the very rich, the use of aggressive tax avoidance measures as well as broadening the GST.

But I have never seen the business community suggesting anything other than increasing the GST and reducing income and company tax levels starting at the top tiers. It would be major achievement for Malcolm Turnball to reform tax along the broader lines I suggested.


----------



## pixel (22 September 2015)

basilio said:


> It will be interesting to see what happens. If one was trying to create a fairer, equitable broad based tax system you would look at international companies getting away with overseas tax havens, the rorting of super by the very rich, the use of aggressive tax avoidance measures as well as broadening the GST.
> 
> But I have never seen the business community suggesting anything other than increasing the GST and reducing income and company tax levels starting at the top tiers. It would be major achievement for Malcolm Turnball to reform tax along the broader lines I suggested.




Given Malcolm's history as a merchant banker, and his links to Goldman Sucks, I'd be surprised to see any serious attempt to make the rich and uber-rich shoulder a fairer share of the tax burden. Cutting Super concessions, negative gearing, and excessive tax deductions is unlikely high on his priority list. Slugging the lowest income earners with 50% more GST will be much easier to push through.

But I'm willing to be pleasantly surprised...


----------



## trainspotter (22 September 2015)

Try taxing the people who pay the most in tax in a fairer system for a start 



> The Treasurer’s statement that the top 10% of incomes from working age persons pay 50% of personal income tax is correct. This reflects the progressive nature of Australia’s personal income tax system, which is applied to a society that features significant income inequality.




http://theconversation.com/factchec...ia-paid-by-10-of-the-working-population-45229


----------



## luutzu (22 September 2015)

pixel said:


> Given Malcolm's history as a merchant banker, and his links to Goldman Sucks, I'd be surprised to see any serious attempt to make the rich and uber-rich shoulder a fairer share of the tax burden. Cutting Super concessions, negative gearing, and excessive tax deductions is unlikely high on his priority list. Slugging the lowest income earners with 50% more GST will be much easier to push through.
> 
> But I'm willing to be pleasantly surprised...




Don't think you'll be getting that pleasant surprises.

Heard Labor's Bowan wanting a more "competitive" corporate tax rate - to 25%. 

It's a race from both parties to please the real Aussie battlers and job creators.


----------



## Tisme (22 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> The government's problem in the main was and still is their policies. If they don't change all the flowery talk from Turnbull means nothing.




Is coal on the agenda?


----------



## SirRumpole (22 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> Is coal on the agenda?





The Infrastructure Prime Minister and the Innovation Prime Minister, both stuck in the Fifties.


----------



## Tisme (22 September 2015)

I wonder if this is the go for the proposed Melbourne to Brisbane transport corridor:

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/16/how-well-make-elon-musks-hyperloop-a-reality-ceo.html


----------



## Knobby22 (22 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> I wonder if this is the go for the proposed Melbourne to Brisbane transport corridor:
> 
> http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/16/how-well-make-elon-musks-hyperloop-a-reality-ceo.html




Cool.


----------



## wayneL (22 September 2015)

I like 







SirRumpole said:


> The Infrastructure Prime Minister and the Innovation Prime Minister, both stuck in the Fifties.




Subtle propaganda can sometimes be quite cool, but when wo obvious it just annoying


----------



## SirRumpole (22 September 2015)

wayneL said:


> I like
> 
> Subtle propaganda can sometimes be quite cool, but when wo obvious it just annoying




Let's just see where Turnbull goes on renewables and if the coal industry still has him by the goolies.


----------



## Wysiwyg (22 September 2015)

Any comments on the Defence Minister? She looks a bit unfit.


----------



## luutzu (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Let's just see where Turnbull goes on renewables and if the coal industry still has him by the goolies.




Chances are they got him and all politician of any real rank by the nut sack. From the few pieces I read about Turnbull's time with NBN, Murdoch would really like what he had done with it. But who knows, he might be too smart and too ambitious to be handled by big businesses... maybe he has way too much money and want to be remembered as a real statesman to me pushed around. 

His big ego might end up serving the public goods.


----------



## galumay (23 September 2015)

Wysiwyg said:


> Any comments on the Defence Minister? She looks a bit unfit.




The previous PM looked pretty fit and look where that got us!


----------



## SirRumpole (23 September 2015)

Wysiwyg said:


> Any comments on the Defence Minister? She looks a bit unfit.




Don't know. Insiders (not the tv show) seem to think she's capable and Turnbull is said not to suffer fools (although Dutton and Brandis are still there ), so lets see how she goes.


----------



## Tisme (23 September 2015)

Wysiwyg said:


> Any comments on the Defence Minister? She looks a bit unfit.




Hercules


----------



## MrBurns (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Don't know. Insiders (not the tv show) seem to think she's capable and Turnbull is said not to suffer fools (although Dutton and Brandis are still there ), so lets see how she goes.




She has a wealth of experience so I think she'll be a breath of fresh air. I remember one  minister of defence that was ordering fighter jets and didn't even know what they looked like.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 September 2015)

MrBurns said:


> I remember one  minister of defence that was ordering fighter jets and didn't even know what they looked like.




Or that they couldn't fly in lightning storms


----------



## MrBurns (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Or that they couldn't fly in lightning storms




Is that a fact ?
I guess bombs don't mix well with lightning.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 September 2015)

MrBurns said:


> Is that a fact ?
> I guess bombs don't mix well with lightning.




http://www.news.com.au/technology/s...lightning-storms/story-fn5fsgyc-1226580674219


----------



## pixel (23 September 2015)

Wysiwyg said:


> Any comments on the Defence Minister? She looks a bit unfit.




She's not supposed to join the ground forces. She's supposed to manage.
And seeing what a mess male-led Forces have made over the centuries - from Gallipoli to Vietnam to the Baghdad "Shock and Awe" - I find it extremely unlikely that a woman can't do a better job.


----------



## Tisme (23 September 2015)

pixel said:


> She's not supposed to join the ground forces. She's supposed to manage.
> And seeing what a mess male-led Forces have made over the centuries - from Gallipoli to Vietnam to the Baghdad "Shock and Awe" - I find it extremely unlikely that a woman can't do a better job.




I don't think she's a Boudicca, Joan of Arc, Marina Raskova or Maggie Thatcher that's for sure.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 September 2015)

I see Ms Credlin has come out fighting blaming everyone but herself. The reality is that if she had done her job better then she may still have it.


----------



## Tisme (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I see Ms Credlin has come out fighting blaming everyone but herself. The reality is that if she had done her job better then she may still have it.




yeah the masculine sisters have been having one of their man hating symposiums where they can blame man built glass ceilings for their lack of progress in emulating male roles. 

another situation where the weak minded are rounded up by the dominants and fed a line about the tribe being held back..... meanwhile, come evening, their husbands are scared to go home and get the rounds for being a b45tard.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 September 2015)

Peta Credlin said she might have been treated differently if she was a man.

Yes, she would have been taken out into a back alley and given a right rough up (know what I mean ?)


----------



## Tisme (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Peta Credlin said she might have been treated differently if she was a man.
> 
> Yes, she would have been taken out into a back alley and given a right rough up (know what I mean ?)




Back in the day they invented quota positions like "human resource" managers so women could fill them. Maybe we should split the prime ministership into a bifurcated position = male+ female


----------



## Logique (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I see Ms Credlin has come out fighting blaming everyone but herself. The reality is that if she had done her job better then she may still have it.



Indeed, the current member best placed to judge, voted with his feet.  New Cabinet Secretary in the Turnbull government, Sen Arthur Sinodinos.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 September 2015)

Logique said:


> Indeed, the current member best placed to judge, voted with his feet.  New Cabinet Secretary in the Turnbull government, Sen Arthur Sinodinos.




Chiefs of staff can be likened to football umpires, if you don't notice them then they are doing a good job.

In all the years Howard was in office and Sinodinus was his C.O.S, I never heard of him, which means he was quietly doing his job behind the scenes.

Credlin on the other hand...


----------



## dutchie (23 September 2015)

The difference between Abbott and Turnbull:


Abbott:  the point, the point, the point.


Turnbull:  waffle, waffle, waffle, the point, waffle waffle, waffle.


----------



## MrBurns (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Chiefs of staff can be likened to football umpires, if you don't notice them then they are doing a good job.
> 
> In all the years Howard was in office and Sinodinus was his C.O.S, I never heard of him, which means he was quietly doing his job behind the scenes.
> 
> Credlin on the other hand...




Credlin is a soccer mom from the wrong side of town, big mouth loads of attitude and a consummate bully.

Tony must have had a dominatrix fetish to keep her around.


----------



## Knobby22 (23 September 2015)

MrBurns said:


> Credlin is a soccer mom from the wrong side of town, big mouth loads of attitude and a consummate bully.
> 
> Tony must have had a dominatrix fetish to keep her around.




Wasn't her job to give advice?
Did she agree with the idea to knight Prince Phillip?


----------



## luutzu (23 September 2015)

Seems Australia has a "spending problem". 

Austerity fails here, there, every where... let's try it again. Might work this time 'round.


Oh man, we're doomed.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 September 2015)

luutzu said:


> Seems Australia has a "spending problem".
> 
> Austerity fails here, there, every where... let's try it again. Might work this time 'round.
> 
> ...




Yes I saw that Morrison interview too.

There is no revenue problem ?

Fine , a GST increase is not necessary then is it ?


----------



## luutzu (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes I saw that Morrison interview too.
> 
> There is no revenue problem ?
> 
> Fine , a GST increase is not necessary then is it ?




na, there's a revenue problem too... So you raise the GST, which will costs people more to spend so they spend more? Then you cut corporate taxes so corporations will pass those tax cuts onto their employees and customers.

Then you cut gov't spending because that will create jobs? Put more money into pensioners and lazy bums pockets?

These guys couldn't do basic maths... maybe it's a higher game plan they're playing.


----------



## Knobby22 (23 September 2015)

Let's not give up yet. It's just making noises at present.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 September 2015)

Morrison suggested the Family Tax Benefits would come under consideration.

This was one of John Howards "reckless spending" schemes financed by the mining boom which has now ended, but I'd like to see him sell cutting this benefit but leaving the high income super tax breaks untouched.


----------



## sptrawler (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Morrison suggested the Family Tax Benefits would come under consideration.
> 
> This was one of John Howards "reckless spending" schemes financed by the mining boom which has now ended, but I'd like to see him sell cutting this benefit but leaving the high income super tax breaks untouched.




How many years ago was that? and what did Labor do about it?  

Jeez, talk about time lapse photography.:1zhelp:

Have you no perception, that since Howard, Labor had two terms of office.

If they thought there was something wrong with the benefit, why aren't they just as responsible, for not addressing it?

You go on about Abbott blaming Gillard, yet you are still blaming Howard? weird logic IMO


----------



## sydboy007 (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Let's just see where Turnbull goes on renewables and if the coal industry still has him by the goolies.




They're still talking about doing their best to prop up the Carmichael coal mine white elephant.

You'd think they could talk about investing in an industry with a long term future, one that isn't facing decades of oversupply.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> How many years ago was that? and what did Labor do about it?
> 
> Jeez, talk about time lapse photography.:1zhelp:
> 
> ...




Labor should have done something about it, but Howard bought it in in the first place, therefore he started the spending spree.


----------



## sydboy007 (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Labor should have done something about it, but Howard bought it in in the first place, therefore he started the spending spree.




Obviously the last one to touch it broke it


----------



## sptrawler (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Labor should have done something about it, but Howard bought it in in the first place, therefore he started the spending spree.




Yes, ok that absconds Labor of any blame.

That is the whole problem with one eyed voters.

Those who brought in policy, to suit the economics of the time, have to wear the consequences ad infinitum.

Just think on it a bit.

As for spending spree, don't forget when Howard left, there was a surplus of $20B + $80B was put  into the future fund to finance Government pension obligations.

That future fund has now doubled to $160B and is going to return money to the Government.

What the ffffff did Labor do, other than a resource rent tax, that would get ffff all now because the resources are worth ffff all.
The other tax, the carbon tax, just made our manufacturing industries non competitive and shut them down.

Maybe you can explain what two terms of Labor did for us, rather than pay out on someone that left a surplus?

It is just limp, to keep skipping over a completely inept useless Labor government. God help us, if they get in next election.IMO


----------



## sptrawler (23 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Obviously the last one to touch it broke it




No Syd, obviously the last one to touch it, did fff all about it.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 September 2015)

Rant rant rant. Does the term GFC mean anything to you ?


----------



## noco (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Rant rant rant. Does the term GFC mean anything to you ?




Yeah......GILLARD FKD our COUNTRY.


----------



## sptrawler (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Rant rant rant. Does the term GFC mean anything to you ?




Not a rant at all, you kept saying Abbott must move on from blaming Labor, then you bring up Howard.

I was just trying to enlighten you, to your blinkered view.

Obviously a futile excercise.

By the way, you didn't give any examples of positive contributions, from two terms of Labor.

A general reference to the gfc, doesn't cut it, the mining investment ramp up carried on untill 2011.

All Labor did, was dumb, throw money out of the window politics. Dumb, Dumb, Dumb.

Our children will pay for it, for many years to come.


----------



## galumay (23 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> All Labor did, was dumb, throw money out of the window politics. Dumb, Dumb, Dumb.




Well in hindsight after a couple of years of an Abbott Government, the 2 ALP Governments that preceeded it look a lot better! 

I wouldnt put them in the category of great governments, but obviously better than Abbott, who history will now judge as arguably the worst PM ever.

We were one of the few countries to dodge recession after the GFC and our Governments played a significant role in that. The mining tax was a good idea, poorly sold and then castrated in an act of political timidity. 

Other achievements included the NDIS scheme, the National Apology to the Stolen Generations, an increase in the Superannuation Gaurantee, winning us a seat on the UN security council, adding breastfeeding as an unlawful grounds for discrimination, Paid Parental Leave and the NBN. 

Gillard managed to get 561 bills through parliament in a minority government, an achievement that dwarfs Abbott's efforts with a majority government.

The biggest failure of recent ALP governments has been an inabilty to articulate the good policy outcomes and an inability to articulate the positives of proposed legislation like the mining tax. 

Anyway, I suspect that your core point is more relevant, it doesnt really matter whether bad policy was introduced by previous LNP or ALP governments, nor does it matter whether they continued to be supported by parties on the opposite side. 

Good government has to start now and Turnbull needs to have the courage, conviction and leadership to make the required changes. Unfortunately the signs are not great, it looks most likely that the relief will be for big business and workers, familys and small business will be slugged once again to placate the big end of town.


----------



## sptrawler (23 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Labor should have done something about it, but Howard bought it in in the first place, therefore he started the spending spree.




Actually, I'll pose to you, the only thing Labor oversaw, was a 40% increase in politicians pay, after they had placed the budget and the Country in a needless tailspin.

I am not over impressed with Turnbull, but he doesn't have to say anything, Labors legacy will kill them.

The only winning card they had was Abbott, now he has gone, they will be shown for the shallow self serving people they are.IMO

No wonder Bowen looks ill, every time you see him, he at least is aware of the problem.IMO


----------



## sptrawler (23 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Good government has to start now and Turnbull needs to have the courage, conviction and leadership to make the required changes. Unfortunately the signs are not great, it looks most likely that the relief will be for big business and workers, familys and small business will be slugged once again to placate the big end of town.




Well he has been in charge for what? one week, and you are saying the signs are not great.

Give me a break.

Who the ff is going to employ you? the unemployed guy next door? or a business that wants to employ more people?

What we should do is double the unemployment benefit, for the unemployed who employ somebody.


----------



## Wysiwyg (23 September 2015)

pixel said:


> She's not supposed to join the ground forces. She's supposed to manage.
> And seeing what a mess male-led Forces have made over the centuries - from Gallipoli to Vietnam to the Baghdad "Shock and Awe" - I find it extremely unlikely that a woman can't do a better job.



Right now she is Nelly no idea and will agree with long term senior advisors.  Fodder for the position.
Another statement Malcolm made was placing new mother Kelly O'Dwyer into the spotlight. He was saying that mothers can handle raising new borns and full time work together. No problems.


----------



## MrBurns (23 September 2015)

Wysiwyg said:


> Right now she is Nelly no idea and will agree with long term senior advisors.
> Another statement Malcolm made was placing new mother Kelly O'Dwyer into the spotlight. He was saying that mothers can handle raising new borns and full time work together. No problems.




She IS a long term senior advisor isn't she ?


----------



## sptrawler (23 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Well in hindsight after a couple of years of an Abbott Government, the 2 ALP Governments that preceeded it look a lot better!
> 
> I wouldnt put them in the category of great governments, but obviously better than Abbott, who history will now judge as arguably the worst PM ever.
> 
> ...




You should probably sit down with an ex Labor minister, and help write their memoirs, you obviously have a bent for it.

Don't know how many would buy it, Abbott rolled them and he was hated.


----------



## Wysiwyg (23 September 2015)

MrBurns said:


> She IS a long term senior advisor isn't she ?



To the Wednesday bingo gathering?


----------



## Wysiwyg (23 September 2015)

Apparently Scott Ryan's ancestry stretches back to Cain and Abel.


----------



## sptrawler (23 September 2015)

galumay said:


> The biggest failure of recent ALP governments has been an inabilty to articulate the good policy outcomes and an inability to articulate the positives of proposed legislation like the mining tax.
> .




I just had to get out of bed, to ask the question, "what was the positives, to the mining tax"?

How was a super profits tax, on a highly speculative, high upfront cost, high risk investment clever?

Why wouldn't you just put a tax/ton on exported resource?


----------



## sydboy007 (24 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> No Syd, obviously the last one to touch it, did fff all about it.




So you believe a party bringing in poor policy is absolved of all blame once out of office?

You have to acknowledge handing Monday out is easier than taking it back. About could even support changes to car fbt do I doubt he'd have helped labor do much cutting of Howard era largesse.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> By the way, you didn't give any examples of positive contributions, from two terms of Labor.




Setting up Infrastructure Australia as an independent body to advise on infrastructure requirements, a body which Abbott re politicised so he could could spend our money on political infrastructure like the Victorian road, a big election pork barrel which the Victorians decided wasn't that important to them after all.


----------



## galumay (24 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Well he has been in charge for what? one week, and you are saying the signs are not great.




Well lets revisit in 6 months and see if I jumped the gun or not. There are signs that the big end of town is where Turnbull's loyaltys lie. The decision with the small business ministry is the most obvious. Some of his mutterings about tax suggest he favours us paying to subsidise the big boys.

We have also had many years to see Turnbulls philosophy so its not just based on one week.

I hope I am wrong and good government really has started, no doubt Mal has more goodwill than most at the starting gate!


----------



## sydboy007 (24 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> As for spending spree, don't forget when Howard left, there was a surplus of $20B + $80B was put  into the future fund to finance Government pension obligations.
> 
> That future fund has now doubled to $160B and is going to return money to the Government.
> 
> ...




Well lets look at the 6 Labor budgets.  By your logic Labor were responsible from the 07/08 to the 12/13 budgets since Abbott was in power for the majority of the 13/14 budget so should take responsibility.

So for Labor's 6 budgets they racked up a deficit of $171.410B.

The liberals have racked up roughly $111B in debt since taking office.  When do you think they'll bring in a balanced budget?

Please provide proof of your claim that the carbon tax caused business to become uncompetitive and shut down.  Trade exposed industries got pretty much all their permits for free.


----------



## sydboy007 (24 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> I just had to get out of bed, to ask the question, "what was the positives, to the mining tax"?
> 
> How was a super profits tax, on a highly speculative, high upfront cost, high risk investment clever?
> 
> Why wouldn't you just put a tax/ton on exported resource?




While royalties do capture some of the rents – the super profit associated with the exploitation of a finite resource that is owned by Australians – they are inefficient. In contrast, a tax on super profits does not distort production decisions. As long as revenue exceeds costs, the company will likely exploit the mine. This was the key rationale for the proposal of the RSPT to replace royalties.

Royalties provide no allowance for costs of investment or operating costs, and in effect taxes not only the return on investment, but also the operating and investment costs as well. This doesn’t make much difference for highly profitable mines, but it makes a big difference for the mines that have lower returns.

A super profits tax is designed so companies pay more tax when times are good and less tax when times are bad.  Output-based royalties now in use collect a smaller share of the returns to resources when profitability is high (they also take a greater share of the returns when profitability is low or negative).

An RSPT would also have increased the cost of increasing production for the major iron ore producers. This is because the price at which smaller, higher cost producers would shut down production would have increased, necessitating even larger increases in production for the major producers’ strategy of displacing small producers to pay off. This would depend on how world prices responded to increases in supply by the large companies.

BHP and RIO shareholders may not be sitting on as massive write downs if the RPST had been legislated in it's original form.

Taxes cause most harm when they fall on mobile factors. That is, they change behaviour most when families and businesses can readily react to the tax by switching to less-taxed activities.

In contrast, immobile tax bases are best. So ''resource rents'' - the return to the minerals themselves - are a logical tax base, as the minerals cannot move in response to higher tax rates.  This reasoning is also why I support a broadly based land tax to replace stamp duties and other inefficient taxes.

That the Rudd Govt set the super profits rate as any profits above the Govt bond rate was silly.  Better to have used a more realistic corporate bond rate, but apart from that the concept was sound.


----------



## Tisme (24 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Well in hindsight after a couple of years of an Abbott Government, the 2 ALP Governments that preceeded it look a lot better!
> 
> I wouldnt put them in the category of great governments, but obviously better than Abbott, who history will now judge as arguably the worst PM ever.
> 
> ...




Don't forget the China free trade agreement which was mostly negotiated by Rudd/Gillard govts, upto the Abbott govt dropping its pants on workers rights at the finish line.


----------



## nioka (24 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> As for spending spree, don't forget when Howard left, there was a surplus of $20B + $80B was put  into the future fund to finance Government pension obligations.
> 
> That future fund has now doubled to $160B and is going to return money to the Government.




That surplus that Howard left was obtained in two ways. Firstly by a transfer to the private sector and secondly by selling off assets.

The future fund is not a future fund for the Australian public generally but a retirement fund for Pollies and public servants. It will return NO money to the government. 

Smoke and mirrors accounting to balance the budget.


----------



## noco (24 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> So you believe a party bringing in poor policy is absolved of all blame once out of office?
> 
> You have to acknowledge handing Monday out is easier than taking it back. About could even support changes to car fbt do I doubt he'd have helped labor do much cutting of Howard era largesse.




How do you hand MONDAY out?


----------



## noco (24 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> I just had to get out of bed, to ask the question, "what was the positives, to the mining tax"?
> 
> How was a super profits tax, on a highly speculative, high upfront cost, high risk investment clever?
> 
> Why wouldn't you just put a tax/ton on exported resource?




Hmmmm...the MINING TAX??????????....that great innovation by the Worlds greatest treasurer.

Cost more to administer than the money received and Swannie spent all the money he didn't receive.

What a joke that clown was and he sits on the back bench with that stupid smirk on his face...I am alright Jack and bugger you.


----------



## sptrawler (24 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Well lets look at the 6 Labor budgets.  By your logic Labor were responsible from the 07/08 to the 12/13 budgets since Abbott was in power for the majority of the 13/14 budget so should take responsibility.
> 
> So for Labor's 6 budgets they racked up a deficit of $171.410B.
> 
> ...




The only thing Abbott can reasonably lay claim to, is stopping the boats, the rest of his tenure was pretty lame.IMO


----------



## sydboy007 (24 September 2015)

Will Turnbull force through the ChAFTA?  More and more it's becoming obvious that Abbott had to sell the ass of Australia to get the Chinese to sign up for it.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/com...t-australian-workers-to-china-20150720-gigata



> …the interpretation of what constitutes sufficient labour market testing is entirely left up to the department. This can be weakly interpreted by the department so that Chinese companies do not have to properly and rigorously test the local labour market in order to access Chinese workers…
> 
> Moreover, the protection afforded to local workers is contained in policy rather than law, as the requirements around the nature, type and duration of labour market testing is up to the department. These can be whittled away at any time so that the ability of these requirements to protect local workers’ preferential access to jobs becomes virtually meaningless.




but wait, it gets worse.  Just wait till the IFA's start to be used to erode local workers rights:



> The worker’s right to remain in Australia is wholly contingent upon the employer’s continuing demand for their labour. Withdrawal of support from the employer-sponsor may mean cancellation of the visa. This threat, actual or perceived, may induce an IFA worker to accept any degree of substandard working conditions and creates a strong disincentive for these workers to voice concerns for fear of being sent home.
> 
> …IFA workers can have lower English skills than under the 457 visa, which will hamper their ability to understand their rights or to complain about their violation. Lower English skills also have concerning implications for workplace safety…
> 
> IFA workers will [also] be unlikely to complain about being paid below the Australian minimum wage because whatever they are earning here is still likely to be more than what they would receive back in China. This provides an even stronger disincentive for IFA workers to bring to light the fact of their exploitation. Without inside informants, it is highly unlikely that the authorities will uncover it.




The above sounds vaguely similar to the growing scandal around 7/11.

If you're not worried yet, maybe a fact check will give you something to mull over

https://theconversation.com/factche...stralia-fta-lock-out-australian-workers-43470



> As part of the agreement, China and Australia have signed a Memorandum of Understanding(MOU) on the topic of an “Investment Facilitation Arrangement” (IFA).The IFA allows a project company registered in Australia but with 50% Chinese ownership to bring in Chinese workers for a proposed infrastructure development project. The development must be projected to involve capital expenditure of A$150 million over its term.
> 
> *There is no requirement under the MOU for labour market testing. This means the project company will not need to prove that they are unable to source Australians to work on the project. There is no requirement to prove that there is a skill shortage or that the project company has had recruitment difficulties in enticing Australian workers. (This is different to the 457 visa programme, where employers are supposed to show they have tried and failed to find Australian workers for jobs, before hiring skilled foreign workers.)…*
> 
> ...




Do you really trust the Govt to negotiate in secret with the Chinese and have the average worker as front and centre for the best outcome in their interests?

maybe another fact check just in case you're still trusting of the Govt

https://theconversation.com/factche...paid-less-under-the-china-australia-fta-44898



> While the very general conditions stipulated in clause 2(e) could be argued to specify some minimum, albeit vague, employment conditions, Clause 5 of the MOU provides the scope for the circumvention of standards and rates of remuneration set through enterprise agreements. Clause 5 reads:
> 
> “1. The project company may be asked to provide additional information by DIBP in respect of its requests for concessions in the above areas. Other than the areas referred to in paragraphs 4(a) through 4(d), the grant of visas will be subject to meeting all other Australian nomination and visa requirements.”
> 
> ...




So the Govt is out arguing that there wont be a flood of low to no english speaking chinese workers flooding into projects backed via Chinese money.  I mean, why would you want the workers to be able to realise they're being paid less than legally required.  Best to ensure they can't communicate if there is by chance the odd Aussie worker involved.

I'm sure the Govt wont engage in shady backroom deals to get investment to try and juice the economy as the public starts to understand the massive wave of job losses from the ending of the mining CAPEX boom, along with the loss of jobs in the car manufacturing and component industries.

I'm sure the interests of the majority of us wage slaves will take priority over the likes of Gina's needs or maybe rescuing FMG from itself.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 September 2015)

Let's hope that Turnbull can do better than this:

Fact check scorecard: How does Tony Abbott's record of claims and promises stack up?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-24/tony-abbott-fact-check-record/6792016


----------



## drsmith (24 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Let's hope that Turnbull can do better than this:
> 
> Fact check scorecard: How does Tony Abbott's record of claims and promises stack up?
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-24/tony-abbott-fact-check-record/6792016



The 25% rating on immigration says it all.

If Labor was still in office with the boats still coming and people still drowning at sea, that probably would have rated 75% in ABC la-la-land.

They're still up to their usual tricks,



> Syrians who have come to Australia by boat and are being held in detention centres are pleading for the Government to accept them as part of its special intake of 12,000 Syrian and Iraqi refugees.








http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-24/detainees-ask-to-be-included-in-12000-refugee-intake/6803120


----------



## noco (27 September 2015)

Turnbull is popular with the ABC and many from the Labor Party but surprised to learn Andrew Bolt does not have Turnbull in his book of favorites.

Bolt was most critical of Turnbull on the Bolt report today.


----------



## sydboy007 (27 September 2015)

noco said:


> Turnbull is popular with the ABC and many from the Labor Party but surprised to learn Andrew Bolt does not have Turnbull in his book of favorites.
> 
> Bolt was most critical of Turnbull on the Bolt report today.




Why were you surprised?

Bolts' views are at the extreme right. Turnbull is generally more centrist.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 September 2015)

Some people just have to stop taking Bolt seriously


----------



## sptrawler (27 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Some people just have to stop taking Bolt seriously




Along with Barrie Cassidy and Tony Jones, same $hit, different chanel


----------



## noco (28 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Along with Barrie Cassidy and Tony Jones, same $hit, different chanel




+1 ....I must agree with you SP.

There are some VERY naive people who take Cassidy and Tony Jones Fabian indoctrinated propaganda seriously as well.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 September 2015)

noco said:


> +1 ....I must agree with you SP.
> 
> There are some VERY naive people who take Cassidy and Tony Jones Fabian indoctrinated propaganda seriously as well.




I prefer to trust long time journalists like Cassidy and Tony Jones than commentators and declared friends of the Liberal Party like Bolt and Alan Jones.


----------



## wayneL (28 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I prefer to trust long time journalists like Cassidy and Tony Jones than commentators and declared friends of the Liberal Party like Bolt and Alan Jones.




How stunningly naive Horace.... and tribal.

Yep we know Bolt and A Jones are conservatives. But you trust the sophistry and feigned impartiality Cassidy and T Jones?

Their all advocates man. On lot are just up front about it.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 September 2015)

wayneL said:


> How stunningly naive Horace.... and tribal.
> 
> Yep we know Bolt and A Jones are conservatives. But you trust the sophistry and feigned impartiality Cassidy and T Jones?
> 
> Their all advocates man. On lot are just up front about it.




To each their own I suppose.

You watch Bolt, I'll watch Insiders.


----------



## sinner (28 September 2015)

wayneL said:


> How stunningly naive Horace.... and tribal.
> 
> Yep we know Bolt and A Jones are conservatives. But you trust the sophistry and feigned impartiality Cassidy and T Jones?
> 
> Their all advocates man. On lot are just up front about it.




lol wayne, a bit of sophistry there labelling Bolt and Alan Jones as merely conservatives when it is pretty clear that they are heavyweight propaganda mouthpieces who will essentially say anything to keep the populace in line. All I can think of when I see Bolts face is the hatchet job he did on Wilkie back in 2003.

What really annoys me is that one can't seem to mention this without others reflexively insinuating that one must also therefore be a mindless leftist drone who listens to whatever the likes of Cassidy and Tony Jones have to say.

But then again, that kind of partisan/reactionary/short term thinking is pretty typical of todays "conservatives"


----------



## McLovin (28 September 2015)

sinner said:


> lol wayne, a bit of sophistry there labelling Bolt and Alan Jones as merely conservatives when it is pretty clear that they are heavyweight propaganda mouthpieces who will essentially say anything to keep the populace in line. All I can think of when I see Bolts face is the hatchet job he did on Wilkie back in 2003.
> 
> What really annoys me is that one can't seem to mention this without others reflexively insinuating that one must also therefore be a mindless leftist drone who listens to whatever the likes of Cassidy and Tony Jones have to say.
> 
> But then again, that kind of partisan/reactionary/short term thinking is pretty typical of todays "conservatives"




If the last month taught us anything it's how utterly insignificant Jones, Hadley and Bolt are in the grand scheme of things. It probably explains why they've been more churlish than usual. They just discovered that the couple of hundred thousand fools who listen to them are not representative of Australia.


----------



## galumay (28 September 2015)

sinner said:


> lol wayne, a bit of sophistry there labelling Bolt and Alan Jones as merely conservatives when it is pretty clear that they are heavyweight propaganda mouthpieces who will essentially say anything to keep the populace in line.




Obviously Bolt & Jones are representative of the loony fringe, but there is a dearth of decent, independent journalism and its certainly not easily accessible from mainstream media with the stranglehold Murdoch has.


----------



## wayneL (28 September 2015)

sinner said:


> lol wayne, a bit of sophistry there labelling Bolt and Alan Jones as merely conservatives when it is pretty clear that they are heavyweight propaganda mouthpieces who will essentially say anything to keep the populace in line. All I can think of when I see Bolts face is the hatchet job he did on Wilkie back in 2003.
> 
> What really annoys me is that one can't seem to mention this without others reflexively insinuating that one must also therefore be a mindless leftist drone who listens to whatever the likes of Cassidy and Tony Jones have to say.
> 
> But then again, that kind of partisan/reactionary/short term thinking is pretty typical of todays "conservatives"




How does that differ from what I said? Ok I didn't  label them propagandists, but I reject I was indulging in any sophistry of my own.


----------



## sptrawler (28 September 2015)

I read today, the Universities have said "Australia will never achieve Turnbull's idea of innovation driving development"

Unless we stop rewarding mediocracy, lol,lol,lol,lol

Get the Labor Party to agree to that, "They must be dreaming".

That is why Labor is full of second rate lawyers, they love being surrounded by mediocracy, they thrive on it. IMO. lol

They want to try and leverage political mileage, for the construction unions, while the rest of the economy goes down the S bend.lol


----------



## Macquack (28 September 2015)

wayneL said:


> How stunningly naive Horace.... and tribal.
> 
> Yep we know Bolt and A Jones are conservatives. But you trust the sophistry and feigned impartiality Cassidy and T Jones?
> 
> Their all advocates man. *On lot are just up front about it*.




Alan Jones, can not stand the man (irrespective of his sexual preference). He was not so upfront about his role in the "Cash for Comments" scandal. In fact that bleeding "so and so" was a shrinking violet, relying on the "age old" defence of "I don't recall anything". He thinks he is the "queen bee" which the former, he is, with out doubt.


----------



## banco (28 September 2015)

sinner said:


> lol wayne, a bit of sophistry there labelling Bolt and Alan Jones as merely conservatives when it is pretty clear that they are heavyweight propaganda mouthpieces who will essentially say anything to keep the populace in line. All I can think of when I see Bolts face is the hatchet job he did on Wilkie back in 2003.
> :




I think Alan Jones believes what he says.  Bolt is more of a performance artist/professional troll.


----------



## galumay (28 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> That is why Labor is full of second rate lawyers, they love being surrounded by mediocracy, they thrive on it. IMO. lol
> 
> They want to try and leverage political mileage, for the construction unions, while the rest of the economy goes down the S bend.lol




Really? How about leaving the shrill, small minded insults for the RWNJ's. 

It really doenst add anything to constructive discussion to make sweeping statements of arrant nonsense.

On topic, there has long been a social expectation of the opportunity of a uni education for all in australia that crosses any party political lines, rather like the expectation of home ownership.

I wont be easy for Unis to open that discussion on a wider level they truly believe their standards have dropped too low.

I also dont imagine its something Turnbull is likely to pick up and run with - electoral suicide really.


----------



## sptrawler (28 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Really? How about leaving the shrill, small minded insults for the RWNJ's.
> 
> It really doenst add anything to constructive discussion to make sweeping statements of arrant nonsense.
> 
> ...




Absolutely, we have become a society, based on striving for the lowest common denominator.

No political party, is going to find it easy, to instil a work ethic back into Australian society.

They have spent years rewarding mediocrity, and punishing endeavour, can't see how they will turn that around.


----------



## Tisme (29 September 2015)

banco said:


> I think Alan Jones believes what he says.  Bolt is more of a performance artist/professional troll.




Professional clowns who enjoy insulting/assaulting intelligent people's sense of humour by using imbecile fans as their props. Too much spoil as kids and not enough rod IMO.


----------



## sydboy007 (29 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Absolutely, we have become a society, based on striving for the lowest common denominator.
> 
> No political party, is going to find it easy, to instil a work ethic back into Australian society.
> 
> They have spent years rewarding mediocrity, and punishing endeavour, can't see how they will turn that around.




Sorry SP, but I don't buy into the lazy aussie stereotype.  I've worked in a number of multinational companies and have always found Americans to be too specialised that you need 10 of them to deal with a problem, europeans are too stratified in their responsibilities, and much of asia there's a fear of doing something wrong so no one will make a fraking decision.

I honestly don't know any lazy locals, and that includes those who've chosen to move here.  To argue about welfare cheats, when just the CGT discount costs more than they do, well the debate needs to move on to a more centrist version of reality.

Talking to people I get a sense there's a slow understanding that things are not good.  People don't quite grasp what's wrong yet, but when I explain to them what the ToT fall is doing to national income they usually have that ah ha moment.

Turnbull certainly doesn't need to come out as a hanrahan doomist, but he could simply start to help people understand why the money ain't there no more and then open up a dialogue as to how much we want to pay for the services we want the Govt to provide.  The "we've got a spending not a revenue problem" just wont cut it any more.

The below chart could very quickly help to bring in some understanding


----------



## Tisme (29 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> The below chart could very quickly help to bring in some understanding
> 
> View attachment 64504




Be interesting to overlay the US profile .... it might take some of the wind out of the blowhards who think our political masters are anything but tweekers of a larger force in play.




sydboy007 said:


> Talking to people I get a sense there's a slow understanding that things are not good. People don't quite grasp what's wrong yet, but when I explain to them what the ToT fall is doing to national income they usually have that ah ha moment.




We have had a leadership that governed like Chicken Little. Even from opposition they traversed the globe telling Wall Street etc how fragile our economy was merely to destabalise the Labor Govt; they campaigned on the imminent swoosh of the Sword Of Damocles (much to the delight of the party loyal voters); our society has been polarised by intransigent hate politics and we have allowed ourselves be distracted from immediate necessary tasks at hand....

.....we are walking zombies waiting for someone to snap us out of the malaise ... a love/hate leader in the calibre of Keating, Hawke or Whitlam .... regardless of political colours, someone with warrior passion and horizonal vision who'll take us on a journey away from the current dull ache of the doldrums  of all boredoms..


It's not a good sign when men start talking about how hard working they are when they are sitting at desks plugging away at keyboards using their university degrees as entry level access. It's equally not a good sign blaming people who actually do the yakka for high production costs when it's the people at the keyboards making up ever new work to rules and work procedures that slows production to grab moments in between toolbox meetings, professional development lectures and uniform fittings.

It's not a good sign when public servants are the vast array of investment housing owners and the vast wealth holders in superannuation.

We have become a lazy nation of gunners who demand high pay for tasks you could write into an app IMO. The males are becoming more estrogen bitchy and prone to tantrums, the women are intent of stepping into male hollows where men are leaving their testicles behind and meanwhile the machines are being made inreal  industrialised countries ready to replace our rapidly heading redundant workforce, holus bolus.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> We have become a lazy nation of gunners who demand high pay for tasks you could write into an app IMO. The males are becoming more estrogen bitchy and prone to tantrums, the women are intent of stepping into male hollows where men are leaving their testicles behind and meanwhile the machines are being made inreal  industrialised countries ready to replace our rapidly heading redundant workforce, holus bolus.




And we insist on bringing in  more people into the country to compete for jobs that machines will be doing in 10 years.

We need to find a substitute for economic growth via population growth, it's just not working any more.


----------



## noco (29 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> And we insist on bringing in  more people into the country to compete for jobs that machines will be doing in 10 years.
> 
> We need to find a substitute for economic growth via population growth, it's just not working any more.




Oh stop being so pessimistic...It is Labor's fault......Malcolm has got it all worked out now that he has seen the light on the hill...


----------



## SirRumpole (29 September 2015)

noco said:


> Oh stop being so pessimistic...It is Labor's fault......Malcolm has got it all worked out now that he has seen the light on the hill...




It is partly Labor's fault. Rudd was a big population man, as was Howard, so they both traded off short term "growth" for longer term unsustainability.


----------



## noco (29 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> It is partly Labor's fault. Rudd was a big population man, as was Howard, so they both traded off short term "growth" for longer term unsustainability.




And Gillard loved the boat people.....50,000 of the blighters  and now we are $11 billion + poorer. and still counting.


----------



## sydboy007 (29 September 2015)

noco said:


> And Gillard loved the boat people.....50,000 of the blighters  and now we are $11 billion + poorer. and still counting.




https://www.population.org.au/artic...ductivity-commission-migrant-intake-australia



> This is despite record high levels of infrastructure investment by State governments. *The Grattan Institute’s report “Budget pressures on Australian governments 2014” notes that “Unprecedented infrastructure spending by states and territories is largely responsible for a $106 billion decline in their finances since 2006,” and that “After a threefold increase in capital spending over the last 10 years, states are paying 3 per cent more of their revenues in interest and depreciation.”*[4] Such pressures have contributed significantly to austerity in welfare and service spending, and to increases in service charges for a range of government-owned and newly privatised services. This pincer-action of increasing cost of living and reducing government support is increasing the inequality of opportunities and outcomes for Australians, with a growing proportion of disenfranchised people experiencing deteriorating security and mental health.




How much of the $45B in poles and wires spending by the electricity networks was due to population growth?  How much was the million $$$ per meter road tunnel beloved by Abbott due to population growth?

The high levels of pop growth we've had for the last 20 or so years is bad for the environment, bad for the sustainability of our cities, bad for the general liveability of cities.  i don't think anyone feels their trip to work is better today than it was 10 let alone 20 years ago.  I remember near empty trains on the way to starting work at 7am in the mid 90s.  Today the carriages are at least half full.

Maybe if the Govt stopped lying to us with GDP figures to tell us bringing in more workers is good for us all, when the fact is that pop growth accounts for over 70% of the growth in the economic pie.  Big business loves the growing market, but for the average worker it's very much a false economy.  A more honest Govt would talk about GDP per capita, and more importantly the distribution of that GDP.  With the current falling ToT it's probably better to talk about per capita NDI, as that's is what we have to spend, what drives taxation revenue.

We're already seeing a significant fall in pop growth due to NOM, and as it's becomes clearer the economy is heading towards recession I wont be surprised if pop growth stagnates, which would be a good thing, but we wont have the money to build the infrastructure to catch up with the past pop growth.

The Govt has unrealistic forecasts for economic growth built into the budget forecasts.  They need to change now.  

Ass Alliance Bersten say



> From the end of 1992 until the Lehman Brothers shock in September 2008, growth in household disposable income per person averaged a remarkable 3.2% a year, with very little volatility. The first half of the period reflects the payoff from the economic reforms of the 1980s, while the second half reflects the China-driven commodity price boom.
> 
> “But that era is now clearly over. *Since the end of 2011, this measure of living standards has been going backwards at a rate of 1.4% a year””a reflection, largely, of the decline in the terms of trade.” The chances of this situation improving during 2016 were slim*, said Bruten, as there appeared to be “still some way to go” before Australia sees an end to the drag effect of the end of the commodities boom, and a pick-up in the non-mining sectors of the economy.


----------



## drsmith (29 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Turnbull certainly doesn't need to come out as a hanrahan doomist, but he could simply start to help people understand why the money ain't there no more and then open up a dialogue as to how much we want to pay for the services we want the Govt to provide.  The "we've got a spending not a revenue problem" just wont cut it any more.



Broadly speaking, tax reform should be about simplicity, integrity and incentive. One thing it shouldn't be about is increasing tax as a proportion of GDP or in other words, bigger government as that dampens incentive.

Specific measures should focus around broadening the base of existing major taxes and using the proceeds to eliminate nuisance taxes and reduce EMTR's on income taxes. On the spending side, governments should identify savings to fund new spending programs such that the overall size of government relative to the economy doesn't increase.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> Broadly speaking, tax reform should be about simplicity, integrity and incentive. One thing it shouldn't be about is increasing tax as a proportion of GDP or in other words, bigger government as that dampens incentive.




Fairness ?

Efficiency ?

Maybe a flat rate of tax on all income with no deductions for both individuals and business, and maintaining the current threshold levels for individuals, and providing a threshold on business depending on the number of people they employ.


----------



## sptrawler (29 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Sorry SP, but I don't buy into the lazy aussie stereotype.  I've worked in a number of multinational companies and have always found Americans to be too specialised that you need 10 of them to deal with a problem, europeans are too stratified in their responsibilities, and much of asia there's a fear of doing something wrong so no one will make a fraking decision.
> 
> I honestly don't know any lazy locals, and that includes those who've chosen to move here.  To argue about welfare cheats, when just the CGT discount costs more than they do, well the debate needs to move on to a more centrist version of reality.
> 
> ]




Well I don't know what circles you work in, but I know for a fact, work that was carried out 30 years ago was completed much faster.
This is due to many thing, from OH&S, work ethic and poor skills.
I'm talking about exactly the same work task, we used to allow two days for a certain task, we now allow five days. You can talk it up as much as you like, at the trade level, attitude, output and quality has dropped considerably.

As for Americans I've worked for and with them on a communications station, yes they do base the majority of training on a competency based system, which we are adopting and embracing.

The difference between us and them is, they have a large labour force which allows them to train people for specific tasks, we don't and therefore find our skill set is falling.
The other difference is their specialists are very highly trained.
When Australian State Governments, were the training grounds for our apprentices, the standard was very high, those days are long gone.

Your right the debate needs to move on to reality, that includes all fronts.


----------



## sydboy007 (29 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> Broadly speaking, tax reform should be about simplicity, integrity and incentive. One thing it shouldn't be about is increasing tax as a proportion of GDP or in other words, bigger government as that dampens incentive.
> 
> Specific measures should focus around broadening the base of existing major taxes and using the proceeds to eliminate nuisance taxes and reduce EMTR's on income taxes. On the spending side, governments should identify savings to fund new spending programs such that the overall size of government relative to the economy doesn't increase.




So you're saying that the current level of taxation is right?  

I do agree that making the tax system simpler is a good goal, but often simplicity and fairness are at opposite ends of the debate.  

The size of Government doesn't really matter.  Look to Sweden / Switzerland / Denmark.  The Govt sector there is quite a bit larger than say the Anglo countries, yet they have societies better educated and more prosperous than say the Uk or USA and have very competitive manufacturing sectors.

What is the difference between taxing to build roads, and building roads via tolls?  If anything, introducing a need to generate a private sector rate of return via tolls means the infrastructure will cost more over it's economic life than if provided via the public sector.  Cutting healthcare funding and forcing a more privatised model like the USA wont save us money and will likely increase costs.

As the henry tax review, and to a degree the current tax white paper, all show that taxing land, resources and consumption, is economically less distorting than taxing income, corporate profits, and various forms of stamp duties.  taxing land would win hands down as increasing efficiency and equity.  taxing consumption, as long as safe guards are enshrined in legislation to protect those on  lower incomes is also a better way forward.  my tax is so high now I purchase an extra week of leave from work.  I'd be happy to buy 2 weeks if my boss would let me.  taxpayers fund 40% of the loss of income and I'm happy to have the extra free time to spend travelling.

So how have you determined what the optimal size of Govt is relative to GDP?  In the 25 years up to 2007-08, the ratio of government revenue to GDP averaged 24.5%. Over the period 2013-14 to 2016-17, that figure is likely to be 23.7%. So were we being over taxed prior to the GFC, or are we under taxed now?

How do you propose managing the real need for pension outlays to double from their current levels?  What services to younger Australian will need to be cut?  Since the GFC pension outlays are up 35% in real terms.

below info is from http://grattan.edu.au/news/australia-should-recover-pension-payments-from-estates/

The pension is already 10% of Govt spending.  The growth in pension outlays is faster than the growth in the economy.  Over the last 10 years, spending on the age pension has grown by 5 per cent a year in real terms. Without legislative change it is forecast to grow by 6 per cent a year for the next 10 years.  

The problem is too many people are eligible for the age pension. Many retirees with significant resources collect at least a part pension. Half of the government’s spending on age pensions goes to people with more than $500,000 in assets. Of those over 65 with $1 million in assets on top of their own dwelling, 80 per cent collect a part pension.

In 2010, governments spent around $32,000 a household over 65, up from $23,000 for the equivalent household in 2004.

If you're not talking about the biggest Federal Government outlay you're not being serious about the taxation system.


----------



## drsmith (29 September 2015)

A big and growing problem overall is the spend on social security and welfare.

http://budget.gov.au/2014-15/content/bp1/html/bp1_bst6_chart_data.htm


----------



## sptrawler (29 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> A big and growing problem overall is the spend on social security and welfare.
> 
> http://budget.gov.au/2014-15/content/bp1/html/bp1_bst6_chart_data.htm




The problem is doc, that answer isn't acceptable, we just have to find more tax to cover the cost.


----------



## nioka (29 September 2015)

drsmith said:


> A big and growing problem overall is the spend on social security and welfare.
> 
> http://budget.gov.au/2014-15/content/bp1/html/bp1_bst6_chart_data.htm




"A big and growing problem overall is the spend on social security and welfare." but a bigger and faster growing problem is the number of public servants and those whose payment comes out of the public purse. Look at this as an example;

In 1970 I was a local councillor, not paid for the service by the way, only given a few dollars each meeting to cover expenses. One man was the building inspector, the planning officer and the health inspector. He was assisted only by a part time secretary that he shared with the engineer. Our current shire has 4 planning officers, 4 building inspectors with health being covered by a large state government department. In addition they pay consultants fees for mostly everything they do. They need legal advice in mostly everything that happens. They are backed up with staff that have more days off than they are at work. Most have "salary packages" that include a car. 

Repeat that all over the state. Remember this is only "local" government. Now repeat again for state and federal governments. Then add the number of service personnel and I don't mean just the armed forces but add police, teachers, hospital staff etc. Indeed add everyone that isn't actually producing actual wealth. I am not insinuating that these are not necessary but these are the high end of the wage earners and are all paid from the public purse. In these groups there are plenty of free loaders that are the real burden in our society. 

Now add the leaches in the system. Leaches are those that bleed the finances without any real end benefit. There are plenty of these in the financial world and the stock market abounds with these.

To compete with those listed above the workers used their unions to have what everyone considers a just wage and priced themselves out of a job. This caused the loss of most manufacturing enterprise in this country. To maintain the so called standard of living we have sold most of the fixed assets to a point where there is nothing much left to sell. To continue along the same path must result in chaos down the track. 

Have a look at the start of things to come by looking at what is happening in the irrigation areas of NSW. The production there was affected by drought and water restrictions were introduced. Water rights became a tradeable asset. So much of the water rights were sold "down the river" to a point where production now can't support the overall community. Schools and banks are closing. Machinery dealerships are laying off staff, businesses are closing down. Suicide is a major cause of death. Don't worry though the government will set up a department to retrain and relocate those cast aside which will in turn add to the non-productive workforce.

That's my take on the state of the nation. I only hope Turnbull government is for a reduction in government spending by reducing the spending in and by the government itself. I doubt that the public servants will allow this to happen as they have a modern meaning of public service. They now believe that it means that the public is there to serve THEM. :1zhelp:


----------



## sydboy007 (29 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> The problem is doc, that answer isn't acceptable, we just have to find more tax to cover the cost.




The problem is the politicians are letting voters lie to themselves. 

What's important is not the quantum of spending, but its quality. Provided spending is efficient and used to fund worthwhile public programs and world class infrastructure, and taxes are raised in the most efficient and equitable manner possible, then it should not matter whether government spending-to-GDP is 24%, 26% or some other figure.

An adequate tax take, along with well-targeted expenditures, are vital elements of a civilised society, and should be the primary focus of fiscal policy, not some arbitrary limit.


----------



## sptrawler (29 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> The problem is the politicians are letting voters lie to themselves.
> 
> What's important is not the quantum of spending, but its quality. Provided spending is efficient and used to fund worthwhile public programs and world class infrastructure, and taxes are raised in the most efficient and equitable manner possible, then it should not matter whether government spending-to-GDP is 24%, 26% or some other figure.
> 
> An adequate tax take, along with well-targeted expenditures, are vital elements of a civilised society, and should be the primary focus of fiscal policy, not some arbitrary limit.




It is a shame you work night shifts IMO, you need to get out into the outlying welfare areas. Spend a bit of time having a beer and chatting, in a pub watching a sporting match.

Get a feel for what it is really like, to be in the welfare trap, I'll guarantee you it won't be like you expect.

Your theories are great, but based on a perfect world, where everyone is honest and plays the game.
How do you tax people, who never want to move off welfare?
How do you make pensions equitable, when three single people live together, pull $72,000?
Yet that is seen as doing it tough.
Do you think people are not aware of the perks? jeez give me a break.

Why do you think all these Syrian refugees in Europe, are requesting to go to Countries with a welfare system?
It's not because they are seeking refuge from persecution, well you may think so.

I look forward to your posts, when you aren't in a financially secure position.

I'm seeing a change in attitudes in W.A, now mining companies are shutting down daily, which in turn is placing questions as to the viability of towns.lol

How about those families that live in the middle of nowhere, working for mining companies that are closing, and they have a mortgage on their house?

Anyway that's my rant, for the day, hopefully the pension still there when I hit 66.5yrs old.lol


----------



## galumay (29 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Why do you think all these Syrian refugees in Europe, are requesting to go to Countries with a welfare system?
> It's not because they are seeking refuge from persecution, well you may think so.




Thats just racist ****, mate. I have been in Turkey & Europe for the last 5 months, you have no effing idea if you are serious and not just a RWNJ troll. 

Its hard to imagine for australians the horror and misery the Syrians are fleeing. You comment is about as stupid and callous as saying the Jews fled Germany to access welfare.

Let us worry about the cost of pensions and welfare once we have dealt with the much larger cost of subsidies to the mining industry.


----------



## sptrawler (29 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Thats just racist ****, mate. I have been in Turkey & Europe for the last 5 months, you have no effing idea if you are serious and not just a RWNJ troll.
> 
> Its hard to imagine for australians the horror and misery the Syrians are fleeing. You comment is about as stupid and callous as saying the Jews fled Germany to access welfare.
> 
> Let us worry about the cost of pensions and welfare once we have dealt with the much larger cost of subsidies to the mining industry.




Well cutting through all the emotional crap mate, why aren't they settling in nearby 'safe' countries?

Because they are after a welfare state, same as the muslims heading to Australia, while passing through several muslim countries.

There isn't racism happening, there is a parasite mentality happening, which is really scary.IMO

Millions fleeing their country, why not fight for it, England has done on several occasions.

Australia also stands up to be counted, they are actually there fighting at the moment.

Give me a break, all the footage I've seen is young able bodied blokes, F###ing off.

You should probably give them the tip, not to come here, we are full of limp dicks already.lol


----------



## sydboy007 (29 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> It is a shame you work night shifts IMO, you need to get out into the outlying welfare areas. Spend a bit of time having a beer and chatting, in a pub watching a sporting match.
> 
> Get a feel for what it is really like, to be in the welfare trap, I'll guarantee you it won't be like you expect.
> 
> ...




I grew up below the poverty line.  I know what it's like to wear second hand clothes and grow your own food and barter with neighbours.  I know what it's like putting fiber glass insulation into roofs in 30 degree heat, mowing 4 or 5 lawns over a weekend with my dad.

The single rate for newstart allowance is $523.40 / fortnight or $13608.40 per year.  A 3 person household would be raking in the princely sum of $40825.  You may also be eligible for rental assistance if you're paying more than $115 / fortnight and need to be paying at least $287.53 a fortnight to get the maximum level of $129.40 / fortnight.  So exactly how do 3 people living together bring in $72K a year on welfare?  The 3 people would need to be paying a minimum $862 / fortnight to get the maximum rental assistance so they'd have net $365 / fortnight to live on.  $180 for food, $30 for electricity.  Suppose they wont need a phone / internet / mobile fone, nor pay for any transportation costs.  definitely not a life I'd chose, and I don't think many will.

What about the families in the mining towns?  We live in a free market economy.  If I made a bad housing investment should I have the right to expect the Govt to bail me out?  You seem to jump between extremes of people fending for themselves and expecting to hear I'm from the Government and I'm here to help.

So how much do you estimate welfare fraud to cost each year?  How would you reduce that figure without unduly penalising people who genuinely need assistance?  There's ~780K people unemployed.  There's ~150K job vacancies.  So over 5 people fighting for each available job.  What's your solution to that problem, because while even motivated people can't all have a job, there's not much point worry about the no hopers.


----------



## galumay (30 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> You should probably give them the tip, not to come here, we are full of limp dicks already.lol




Ok, confirmed, another bigoted, racist RWNJ to add to the ignore list. 

You really have no idea, you get your information from fellow travellers, bogans, red necks, the murdoch run propoganda machine. 

As I said I have actually been to these places and seen and talked to families fleeing the horror. I have seen with my own eyes what Syria has been reduced to, you really dont have the slightest idea and its bigots like you that make me ashamed to be an australian - a country with a proud tradition of accepting refugees from europe after the war and then the vietnamese and cambodians that all helped build out country. 

Now all that is put at risk by the xenophobia sweeping our country, fed by the shock-jocks and the ulta-right religious extremists.

I hate to think how your type would have reacted to the millions fleeing the holocoust and the nightmare of the aftermath of WW2, thankfully we lived in a more humane time and they were welcomed with open arms.


----------



## sptrawler (30 September 2015)

galumay said:


> Ok, confirmed, another bigoted, racist RWNJ to add to the ignore list.
> 
> You really have no idea, you get your information from fellow travellers, bogans, red necks, the murdoch run propoganda machine.
> 
> ...




Like I said, why aren't they staying and fighting, or at least residing in nearby countries, to go back after the conflict?
Emotional claptrap.


----------



## sptrawler (30 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> I grew up below the poverty line.  I know what it's like to wear second hand clothes and grow your own food and barter with neighbours.  I know what it's like putting fiber glass insulation into roofs in 30 degree heat, mowing 4 or 5 lawns over a weekend with my dad.
> 
> The single rate for newstart allowance is $523.40 / fortnight or $13608.40 per year.  A 3 person household would be raking in the princely sum of $40825.  You may also be eligible for rental assistance if you're paying more than $115 / fortnight and need to be paying at least $287.53 a fortnight to get the maximum level of $129.40 / fortnight.  So exactly how do 3 people living together bring in $72K a year on welfare?  The 3 people would need to be paying a minimum $862 / fortnight to get the maximum rental assistance so they'd have net $365 / fortnight to live on.  $180 for food, $30 for electricity.  Suppose they wont need a phone / internet / mobile fone, nor pay for any transportation costs.  definitely not a life I'd chose, and I don't think many will.
> 
> ...




I tried to post a long winded response, but quotes were missing.

So the short answer
Three pensioners = $74k

Why should the Government, bail out those who moved to a mining town and bought a house and now find themselves broke?
They shouldn't, but they have paid taxes, which paid welfare to all those who didn't want to move to outback Australia. Yet you have plenty of sympathy for them.

So how much welfare fraud goes on, heaps, it is just politicly incorrect to mention it.

The good thing is, your generation is really going to cop it.lol
As the tot falls and unemployment increases, so will the creativity of welfare fraud, which the employed will have to fund.

As for retirees, as the economy declines so will pensioners nest eggs, which will increase the dependence on the pension. Which the employed will have to fund.

Not my problem.

I suppose the question is more about, when you think welfare is a problem, the workers will always fund it.

Retirees have a finite source of funds, not so workers.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> So how much do you estimate welfare fraud to cost each year?  How would you reduce that figure without unduly penalising people who genuinely need assistance?  There's ~780K people unemployed.  There's ~150K job vacancies.  So over 5 people fighting for each available job.  What's your solution to that problem, because while even motivated people can't all have a job, there's not much point worry about the no hopers.




There certainly is high unemployment and under employment, the question is what is the cause and what is the solution ?

a. Low tariffs and increased imports ? Do we turn protectionist ?

b. High minimum wages ? Do we cut wages and benefits like overtime ?

c. Increasing technology putting people out of work ? This trend is unstoppable and there is very little we can do about it.

d. Increased 457 "guest" fly-in, fly out workers ? There is obviously something that can be done about this if its a significant problem.

e. Lack of education and training of the workforce ? Obviously needs increased government spending which is       political poison to our current government.

It's beyond me to know which of the above factors are the major contributors to high unemployment, but someone in government knows or should know but the push factor from the public to solve these problems is apparently not strong enough yet.


----------



## noco (30 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> There certainly is high unemployment and under employment, the question is what is the cause and what is the solution ?
> 
> a. Low tariffs and increased imports ? Do we turn protectionist ?
> 
> ...




Rumpy, you won't have to worry about any of those things shortly..

We will be issued with a copy of the Koran and pray 5 times a day on our special little mats...Allah will save us...Don't you worry about that.

We pray 5 times X 10 minutes = 50 minutes per day = 304 hours per year per person.

But on the other hand I am not sure who will win out out.....Islam or the Fabians.

Or perhaps they might even amalgamate...

So go to bed tonight and wake up the solution in hand.


----------



## Tisme (30 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> When Australian State Governments, were the training grounds for our apprentices, the standard was very high, those days are long gone.
> 
> .




Absolutely true. The e.g. railways trained apprentices had no peers, but conservative govts saw the facilities as union and Labor nurseries and therefore evil. 


I too witness the trades skills of today and it's not so much poorer ability, but much more of it and with the classically trained people now reaching retirement we will see many more lego tradespeople with poor skillsets dragging down productivity but demanding better renumeration.


----------



## Tisme (30 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> There certainly is high unemployment and under employment, the question is what is the cause and what is the solution ?
> 
> a. Low tariffs and increased imports ? Do we turn protectionist ?
> 
> ...




You talk like govts want to have employment for all......... that would be a bad thing because it would push up wages and make us uncompetitive...much better to treat people as a means of production and use unemployment to put pressure downwards on labor inputs and therefore c.o.g.s.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> You talk like govts want to have employment for all......... that would be a bad thing because it would push up wages and make us uncompetitive...much better to treat people as a means of production and use unemployment to put pressure downwards on labor inputs and therefore c.o.g.s.




Yes, unemployment created by high immigration of people prepared to accept lower wages and conditions.


----------



## sinner (30 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Like I said, why aren't they staying and fighting, or at least residing in nearby countries, to go back after the conflict?
> Emotional claptrap.




Ignorant claptrap.

Firstly, the ones who can fight are fighting. Of course we don't support secularist democratic fearsonely effective fighters like the Kurds, who we completely ignored until they almost succeeded in sealing the Turkish border through which ISIS nutters had been pouring out of like flies. That was the point we decided to get involved, by allowing Turkey to bomb the Kurds in return for access to Incirlik airbase.

No. Rather our plan is to support Al Qaeda and other nutjobs because our goal is regime change for Assad, not destroying ISIS.

Secondly, expecting civilians to fight against Saudi/Wahhab funded and armed nutjob shock troops called ISIS is so naive of even the last 5y of Arab Spring context as to be laughable. Your ignorance hat is cutting off oxygen, remove before permanent damage is done.

Thirdly, you are clearly ignorant of the fact that "nearby countries" like Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon are taking in and have already housed more refugees per day than the developed world takes in a week. Syrians are generally intensely nationalistic and love their country. Most never wanted to leave and have only done so thanks to actions out of their control, like the rise of ISIS destroying their entire family and homes, the same ISIS which spawned from the ashes of the Baathist Iraqi army that we so wantonly disbanded in 2003.

SERIOUSLY. If you have no idea what you're talking about (and it is blatantly obvious that you don't), just SHUT UP.


----------



## sptrawler (30 September 2015)

sinner said:


> Ignorant claptrap.
> 
> Firstly, the ones who can fight are fighting. Of course we don't support secularist democratic fearsonely effective fighters like the Kurds, who we completely ignored until they almost succeeded in sealing the Turkish border through which ISIS nutters had been pouring out of like flies. That was the point we decided to get involved, by allowing Turkey to bomb the Kurds in return for access to Incirlik airbase.
> 
> ...




Are you serious? with the world wars, do you think the English were running away to find asylum in other countries. 
When German troops were 20k's away in France and bombing the crap out of the U.K, did they take off to America?

No they were fighting, German and Italian nutjobs. 
Excusing mass economic migration, as some form of fleeing persecution is laughable.

Last I heard ISIS had 30,000 fighters, how many young blokes have taken off 500,000?


----------



## SirRumpole (30 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Are you serious? with the world wars, do you think the English were running away to find asylum in other countries.
> 
> No they were fighting, German and Italian nutjobs. Excusing mass economic migration, as some form of fleeing persecution is laughable.
> 
> Last I heard ISIS had 30,000 fighters, how many young blokes have taken off 500,000?




There is a difference, the Syrians are fighting their own government, not just ISIS.


----------



## sptrawler (30 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> There is a difference, the Syrians are fighting their own government, not just ISIS.




I'm talking about the mass migration, under the guise of persecution and the fact the refugees are being selective on relocation. That a war is on is a fact, that the people should be relocated to a country of choice, is laughable.


----------



## Tisme (30 September 2015)

Getup's not happy with the TPP:



> _Scumbag Alert:
> Overnight, the price of a drug used for treating people living with HIV/AIDS jumped from $13.50 a pill to $750. That's an increase of more than 5500%! The CEO of the company, which recently acquired the rights to the drug, defended the price hike as motivated by profit.1
> 
> This is exactly the type of shameless price-gouging we could see if Australia signs onto the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership deal (TPP). Trade Minister Robb will risk our access to affordable medicine if he caves in to the demands of the big US pharmaceutical companies to extend their monopolies over medicines.
> ...


----------



## Tisme (30 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> There is a difference, the Syrians are fighting their own government, not just ISIS.




Times have changed ...when the US was going through its civil war, people from everywhere jumped on ships to be press ganged into the battle fields.... both sides used impressment to conscript anyone silly enough not to be wearing a burka and carrying a koran!


----------



## SirRumpole (30 September 2015)

The rats are leaving...

Tony says they should grit their teeth and bear it !

Obviously all those "god is on our side" Conservative Christians deserting.

Dumped minister Eric Abetz urges voters to stick with Liberal Party amid 'hundreds of resignations'




> Dumped cabinet minister Eric Abetz has urged Liberal supporters to support the Turnbull Government amid concerns over "hundreds of resignations" from the party.
> 
> The former employment minister and leader of the house in the Senate — who lost both roles under new Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull — emailed supporters on Wednesday, saying members "owed allegiance" to party beliefs despite the change in leadership.
> 
> ...


----------



## sptrawler (30 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> The rats are leaving...
> 
> Tony says they should grit their teeth and bear it !
> 
> ...




Maybe it is just people, who are fed up with the constant changing of PM's, Abbott was voted in. 
Then the party decides to ditch him, they should have waited until the people voted.
Pandering to the media and opinion polls, isn't the answer.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> I'm talking about the mass migration, under the guise of persecution and the fact the refugees are being selective on relocation. That a war is on is a fact, that the people should be relocated to a country of choice, is laughable.




A lot of Jews selected the USA during the war and they run the place now.


----------



## sydboy007 (30 September 2015)

sptrawler said:


> I tried to post a long winded response, but quotes were missing.
> 
> So the short answer
> Three pensioners = $74k
> ...




I still don't understand how 3 pensioners = $74K

3 single pensioners will at most bring in 61.5K of base pension.

I have the same sympathy for anyone who needs welfare.  I don't see someone in a mining town any more or less deserving.  I don't see someone in minto or rooty hill any more or less deserving of help.  So people who are happy / willing to move outback for work are somehow better "team australia" in your view?

So if there's heaps of welfare fraud going on, what's your evidence and what $ figure would you put it at?

Why are you so snarky about being happy that gen x and those who come after us are going to have to mop up the issues your generation has created?


----------



## sydboy007 (30 September 2015)

Tisme said:


> Getup's not happy with the TPP:




The TPP is worse than the ChAFTA.  Expect all imported IP to cost more, and see PBS costs balloon up even more than the $200M+ the AUS-US FTA has caused


----------



## sydboy007 (30 September 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> The rats are leaving...
> 
> Tony says they should grit their teeth and bear it !
> 
> Obviously all those "god is on our side" Conservative Christians deserting.




Could be the best thing for MT.  If the likes of Bernardi feel their support base crumbling within the party they will either exert less power, allowing MT to move further towards the centre, or they'll leave, which would be the best thing for the Liberals to allow them back to being true liberals.


----------



## sptrawler (30 September 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> I still don't understand how 3 pensioners = $74K
> 
> 3 single pensioners will at most bring in 61.5K of base pension.



The actual figure is between our figures, as usual I was going from memory.

http://www.superguide.com.au/accessing-superannuation/age-pension-rates



sydboy007 said:


> I have the same sympathy for anyone who needs welfare.  I don't see someone in a mining town any more or less deserving.  I don't see someone in minto or rooty hill any more or less deserving of help.  So people who are happy / willing to move outback for work are somehow better "team australia" in your view?




I have a bit more sympathy for those who move to regional areas, to find work, it is a remote and hard existence, but if people aren't prepared to go there Australia will suffer.
To me it isn't acceptable to sit on welfare in Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane and Perth, while we are bringing in 457, to do unskilled tasks, in remote areas.



sydboy007 said:


> So if there's heaps of welfare fraud going on, what's your evidence and what $ figure would you put it at?



My evidence, is getting a leave pass from the missus, and mixing with all the unemployed whaling it up at the local, drinking pints. I ask my mate, how the hell can they afford it? he tells me ff knows but they are here every night.lol



sydboy007 said:


> Why are you so snarky about being happy that gen x and those who come after us are going to have to mop up the issues your generation has created?




I guess it is because, after a lifetime of doing without, I can see it is more of a millstone than an achievement.

It will take a long time, before laziness and self indulgence, is recognised for what it is. Just my opinion, which is completely out of step with yours, so be it.


----------



## sptrawler (1 October 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> So how much do you estimate welfare fraud to cost each year?  How would you reduce that figure without unduly penalising people who genuinely need assistance?  There's ~780K people unemployed.  There's ~150K job vacancies.  So over 5 people fighting for each available job.  What's your solution to that problem, because while even motivated people can't all have a job, there's not much point worry about the no hopers.




I forgot to answer this one.

I've done without and my family have done without, we lived in the North of Australia, without air con, to save money.
I'm self funded, from my savings, yet I could be on welfare, I would qualify, but I chose not to apply.

You are concerned that welfare isn't enough, you fund it, stop asking for a reduction in personal income tax.

Feel that you are doing your bit, to support those more needy.

All you seem to come up with, is how to take from others, to support your pet feel good causes.


----------



## sydboy007 (1 October 2015)

sptrawler said:


> I forgot to answer this one.
> 
> I've done without and my family have done without, we lived in the North of Australia, without air con, to save money.
> I'm self funded, from my savings, yet I could be on welfare, I would qualify, but I chose not to apply.
> ...




Care to quote when I've said that?  I do wish you'd check your facts before posting.  It's hard to have a constructive debate when you're making things up.

I've argued for around 3 years on this forum for changes to make the tax system simpler and fairer.  I've called for a move away from taxing effort to taxing land, resources, and consumption.  I've accepted the arguments from various govt inquiries into how we can move towards a better tax system.  It's not rocket surgery, just a hard fight against the vested interests benefiting from the current system.

Why do we have a capital gains tax system that provides a rebate where 75% of the proceeds goes to the top income decile?  Why do the top 2 income deciles get half the super tax concessions? Why does the bottom income decile pay more tax on super contributions than they do on their income?

Does ScoMo think along these lines? From his initial slogans it doesn't sound like it, but I live in hope that MT is going back to everything is on the table. Without meaningful reform we're headed to a divided society like America.  I know I'd not have the good life I do now if I'd been unfortunate enough to have been born there. I don't want that for future generations in Australia.

To repeat myself 

What's important is not the quantum of spending, but its quality. Provided spending is efficient and used to fund worthwhile public programs and world class infrastructure, and taxes are raised in the most efficient and equitable manner possible, then it should not matter whether government spending-to-GDP is 24%, 26% or some other figure.

An adequate tax take, along with well-targeted expenditures, are vital elements of a civilised society, and should be the primary focus of fiscal policy, not some arbitrary limit.


----------



## Logique (1 October 2015)

Tax reform, Turnbull government style.

"Everything's on the table" - baloney. The top end will get a tax cut to 'avoid bracket creep'.  Big business will be just fine with existing arrangements, and might even get a cut to the company tax rate.  Raise the Medicare levy? As if!

"We'd compensate lower income groups for broadening and raising of the GST" - baloney - how do you compensate the self funded retiree, or the students existing hand to mouth on (likely to be slashed) penalty rates.  Below $18,000 you're not paying tax, so a rebate's no good. 

The Coalition and business elite is circling, like so many vultures. The tax pain will be applied from the bottom up, not top down.


----------



## Tisme (2 October 2015)

I still get niggled when I hear of Universities wanting to raise fees to cover the cost of what is now mostly done over the internet.

They spend enormous amounts on infrastructure, creating study space that houses 4 or so people with laptops that would have housed 40 with bags and books, thirty years ago.

They espouse market forces, but run their infrastructure spend on the basis of cronyism and closed tenders. 

Crying poor all the time while spending big on swanky buildings that will eventually just be study halls is irritating to me. e.g.:

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment...lbourne-school-of-design-20140918-10ilgz.html


Let's hope Malcolm will push the barrow of affordable education for all and defund universities who won't focus on their core fundamentals.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> I still get niggled when I hear of Universities wanting to raise fees to cover the cost of what is now mostly done over the internet.
> 
> They spend enormous amounts on infrastructure, creating study space that houses 4 or so people with laptops that would have housed 40 with bags and books, thirty years ago.
> 
> ...




The Coalition persist in treating universities as a private business, when in reality they are part of the national infrastructure that serve the national interest and therefore should be guided and monitored by government to ensure that they are turning out the types of students THIS COUNTRY , not foreign countries need.


----------



## sptrawler (2 October 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Care to quote when I've said that?  I do wish you'd check your facts before posting.  It's hard to have a constructive debate when you're making things up.
> 
> I've argued for around 3 years on this forum for changes to make the tax system simpler and fairer. * I've called for a move away from taxing effort*




I didn't have to look far, you have called for a reduction in personal income tax on several occassions, I can't be bothered scolling back through your posts, you inference in this very post supports my claim.

Personal income tax has come down as a percentage of income over the last 30 years, and welfare has gone up relative to cost of living.

I have no issue with your suggestions as to tax reform, just your belief that welfare should somehow be a substitute for endeavour and sacrifice, it is meant to be a safety net.

We will never have enough money, to support it, as a lifestyle choice. How that is overcome, who knows, but continually avoiding the issue, or denying it won't work.

There are a lot of welfare recipients, who are there through no fault of their own, but parking there shouldn't be a long term option. 
It leads to a lifetime of welfare, as they don't accumulate super and or savings, this in turn leads to intergenerational welfare.
Obviously while the country is in a downturn, there will be an increase in unemployment, but there was never an excuse while we were bring in unskilled 457.

The one thing in Australia's favour IMO, is it is a growing country and will need more workers for years to come.
That is why it is imperative, that the social system is set to encourage the migration of people chasing work and opportunity, not chasing welfare. Again just my opinion.


----------



## luutzu (2 October 2015)

sptrawler said:


> I didn't have to look far, you have called for a reduction in personal income tax on several occassions, I can't be bothered scolling back through your posts, you inference in this very post supports my claim.
> 
> Personal income tax has come down as a percentage of income over the last 30 years, and welfare has gone up relative to cost of living.
> ...




Really? Income tax goes down, big loopholes keep popping up, and welfare kept getting harder and harder to get, and getting less and less of it. That's what I thought.

Have said it before, social security is not to protect or help the poor, it was meant to protect the rich. That they ought to "lose" some or else lose all of it in revolutions.

If Australia do not have mandatory voting, it'll probably have the same percentage of voter turnout as the US - where some 60% of voters don't give a hoot and not bothered. 

There's only so many immigrants and refugees the media and politician dog whistling can put the blame on. Take enough of the crumbs away from the masses and things will happen as they always has since recorded history.

Was watching the Finance Minster interview on ABC yesterday. His answers were just like a political parody.
There's no revenue problem, a spending problem we have. So Australia will need to be more competitive, more efficient, more innovative... when the anchor ask how specifically do we achieve those, the dude said something like: we're working on it.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 October 2015)

luutzu said:


> Was watching the Finance Minster interview on ABC yesterday. His answers were just like a political parody.
> There's no revenue problem, a spending problem we have. So Australia will need to be more competitive, more efficient, more innovative... when the anchor ask how specifically do we achieve those, the dude said something like: we're working on it.




Good old Mathias, I saw him on ABC News breakfast this morning

Interviewer: There seems to be a consensus out of the meeting that something needs to be done about negative gearing and superannuation tax concessions

Corman: The consensus was that (something else entirely)...

They just can't bring themselves to admit that tax concessions for their mates on upper incomes are costing this country billions.

Stupid twits.


----------



## sptrawler (2 October 2015)

luutzu said:


> Really? Income tax goes down, big loopholes keep popping up, and welfare kept getting harder and harder to get, and getting less and less of it. That's what I thought.
> 
> Have said it before, social security is not to protect or help the poor, it was meant to protect the rich. That they ought to "lose" some or else lose all of it in revolutions.
> 
> ...




I always like your take on things, it is an interesting angle and as usual there is a lot of truth in it as in most peoples comments.

Immigration is an issue in all Western Countries, as generally they all have a falling birth rate, therefore most population growth comes from immigration.

The bothering trend, again only my opinion, is the growing propensity of recent immigrants to park on welfare, in Capital cities.

Australia can't support its welfare spending growth, without increasing taxes, or validating the qualification for it.

As Syd said, we can't just keep on increasing the tax on effort, investment and risk taking, these are the things that grow the wealth of the Country. 
That it can be made less generous, I don't disagree with, but you have to find the right balance, for risk, return and effort, reward.

What I disagree with, is that no one can mention welfare spending, without getting shouted down.

Take for example the indigenous situation, there is no worse plight in Australia, than their plight. Yet endless amounts of welfare has been thrown at the problem, to no avail.
The best thing for unemployed people, is a job, it gives them a reason to get up in the morning, it fills in their day and mostly it gives them a feeling of self worth and purpose.

It isn't an easy issue to resolve, but it needs honest and open discussion to resolve it, not just name calling or questioning peoples humanity, compassion or lack of generousity.

It is a terrible situation, where people are too scared to even make suggestions, for fear of public ridicule and media bashing.


----------



## Logique (3 October 2015)

The cost to Medicare (that is taxpayers) of making Nurafen and Codral prescription only, is estimated to be $700 Mill.

Codral, Nurofen and Panadeine.  You'll have to go to the doctor to get these. The AMA supports this, gee what a surprise.

The Turnbull government should never again lecture us about waste. This is waste, $700 Mill worth.



> *All codeine-containing medications could be prescription-only from next year* - October 2, 2015
> http://www.smh.com.au/national/all-...ptiononly-from-next-year-20151001-gjzdex.html
> 
> Common painkillers such as Nurofen Plus and Panadeine could soon require a doctor's prescription after a shock decision by Australia's drug regulator.
> ...


----------



## Ijustnewit (3 October 2015)

What a crazy idea indeed , as one of the users of Mersyndol , it will now cost me a doctors consultation and you can bet the $8.00 dollars a box will increase to $25 or more.
It's not like you can multiple boxes of this stuff if your honest anyway , they demand your licence here in Tasmania and you can only buy 1 box of about 12 tablets. As I tell the chemist ( as they drag me over the coals like some sort of crazed druggy ) I only use it for severe pain from a fractured rib injury when the Rx anti imflammatories aren't doing the job when I over do it at home or work.
The waiting list to get into a GP here in Tasmania can be days as it is , and now I will have to sit around in a waiting room of sick people and catch a bloody flu just to get a box of painkillers.


----------



## sydboy007 (3 October 2015)

sptrawler said:


> I didn't have to look far, you have called for a reduction in personal income tax on several occassions, I can't be bothered scolling back through your posts, you inference in this very post supports my claim.
> 
> Personal income tax has come down as a percentage of income over the last 30 years, and welfare has gone up relative to cost of living.
> 
> ...




Right, so i call for a cut in come taxes.  Now how did I suggest we fund these?

I've argued for winding back NG and CGT.  I've argued for a SHIFT AWAY from income and corporate taxes and replacing them taxes on land / resources / consumption.

You somehow conflate my argument for a move away from taxing effort ie income and corporate profits, with a support for ever increasing welfare.  

When Abbott proposed making the under 30s wait up to 6 months for income support, he failed to mention they made up just 1% of the cost tot he budget, but the savings projected were something like 10% of the total savings of the first Abbott budget.  Do you see any unfairness in that, especially at a time when there's around 5 people trying to get just 1 job.  Social security payments are generally well targeted in Australia.  We have the lowest 3rd spending in the OECD.

This chart is from the 2012-13 budget, but I doubt things are terribly different now.  It seems unfair to target the relatively small area of unemployment benefits when there's far fatter areas of spending that can be targeted as well.




For the last 3 years there's been no need to have any 457 Visas issued.  The Laberals should have had a policy of a levy for 457 Visas where those funds would be used to provide subsidies for locals to study at TAFE so that in future we wont every need to bother with 457 Visas again as we'll have a highly educated workforce capable of doing the things needed to maintain a modern society.

You somehow don't see that a choice to spend $10B is no different to the choice of not collecting $10B in income.

There is no difference with the Govt treating capital gains as standard income and fully taxing it and then have a capital tax grants scheme where half the CGT proceeds are given back to those paying the CGT.  yet somehow this isn't just like welfare spending.  The same principle applies to the super tax concessions, and NG.  Why do we still have NG on existing stock.  over 90% of IP loans are for exisiting dwelling.  It's a crazy policy, but way too many powerful vested interests that are well financed and able to mobilise to stop any reform.

I don't believe that looking at how much Govt rev is as a % of GDp tells us anything.  You would likely argue that a country that collects 23% is better than a country that collects 30%, whereas I'd argue that it's all about the efficiency around collecting that revenue in the least distorting way, and in Australia we have an over reliance on the most distorting taxes, and then spending that money where it meets the social objectives we have decided upon, and that provides the infrastructure required for a globally competitive economy.

A Govt to could chose to under invest, and with the rampant pop growth since 2000 that is a major cause of the congestion and declining quality of life most Australians would agree has occured, and force toll roads and user pays on the community, but is that any different to the Govt providing that infrastructure via the taxation system?

Your support and belief in immigration as some panacea surprises me, though it is very much the orthodoxy in the Govt and espoused by most businesses because they're lazy and like a growing market to rise all boats.  Pop growth acts as a tax on us all, as can be seen by the $45B spend on the east coast electricity networks, and can be seen by the new public transport lines needed to be built, new roads / tunnels / bridges.  Pop growth causes a decline in productivity via congestion, and then we have to hope that infrastructure investments will help to alleviate the productivity impediments just to get back to where we were.  NOM of a perth every 3ish years seems absurd to me.  NOM along the lines of a newcastle every 4-5 years seems a bit easier to digest, but i subscribe to the populate and perish idea these days.


----------



## sptrawler (3 October 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Right, so i call for a cut in come taxes.  Now how did I suggest we fund these?
> 
> I've argued for winding back NG and CGT.  I've argued for a SHIFT AWAY from income and corporate taxes and replacing them taxes on land / resources / consumption.
> 
> ...




I'll keep it short and sweet, I'm over this whole debate.

I've always said, we shouldn't be increasing taxing on the productive side of the economy, i.e income tax, thereby making them less competitive.
It wasn't long ago, you were laying the blame for our financial woes on the Howard/ Costello personal tax cuts, now you seem to see the logics.

Winding back negative gearing and capital gains tax breaks, may be a good idea and I've agreed with you. However, if it was easy to impliment with no adverse effects, Labor would have introduced it. The tax incentives were introduced for a reason, from memory, it was to stimulate investment and risk.
Back in the 1970's and 80's, most public housing was supplied by Governments, as the returns for private investors just wasn't there. The rapid property price rises, is a recent phenomena, returns from property was abysmal.
To a certain degree the same problem existed in the share market, there was very little public participation, to increase the attractiveness tax breaks had to be introduced.
For example, why would you risk your money and forgo lifestyle, to buy shares? When if you made a profit, it was added to your income, if you were given a dividend it was added to your income, if it went broke tough.

With the 457 visas, why should the Liberals have introduced a training levy on them, why shouldn't a training levy have been applied through the boom when they were pouring in? It would make more sense.
Better still, why weren't our able bodied unemployed, asked to give good cause, why they shouldn't go to where the work was. 

Welfare whether it be, unemployment, pension, disability, health spending, education, whatever, should be constantly reviewed to ensure they are still fit for purpose. 
It is no different than tax breaks and or concessions, they should be reviewed to see that they still reflect a need and are sensible.
What I find annoying is, as soon as the words, cut in spending are raised, everyone gets stupid about it.
Like my brother in law chose to have a colonoscopy, rather than send in a sample, what a waste of money and resources.

You know as well as I, that I'm personally against an increase in population, until it can be afforded, as it will result in a lowered living standard.
That doesn't change the fact, that both Labor and the Coalition are pushing for it, as we do have a falling birth rate.

Anyway like I said, we agree on most things, other than welfare, so that's not too bad.


----------



## sptrawler (3 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> The Coalition persist in treating universities as a private business, when in reality they are part of the national infrastructure that serve the national interest and therefore should be guided and monitored by government to ensure that they are turning out the types of students THIS COUNTRY , not foreign countries need.




The problem is, our students don't want to do the courses our country needs, the foreign students do.


----------



## sydboy007 (3 October 2015)

sptrawler said:


> I've always said, we shouldn't be increasing taxing on the productive side of the economy, i.e income tax, thereby making them less competitive.
> It wasn't long ago, you were laying the blame for our financial woes on the Howard/ Costello personal tax cuts, now you seem to see the logics.




The income tax cuts provided by the Howard Govt, combined with the halving of CGT, tax free super, halving of the pension assets test taper were not affordable over the long term.  As soon as the ToT started to revert to the long term mean deficits were assured.

Do you accept that interest rates were at the highest in a generation due to the tax cuts that Howard forced through?  An economically rational person wouldn't add fuel to the inflation fire, but that's what Howard did.  How much did 2% of mortgage interest rate rises suck from the economy?  How much did that add to the personal debt pile that increased by 100% of GDP over the Howard Govt.

I'm not arguing that we should have got no income tax cuts, but the budget was sent into a structural deficit by the hollowing out of revenue.



sptrawler said:


> It is no different than tax breaks and or concessions, they should be reviewed to see that they still reflect a need and are sensible.
> What I find annoying is, as soon as the words, cut in spending are raised, everyone gets stupid about it.
> Like my brother in law chose to have a colonoscopy, rather than send in a sample, what a waste of money and resources.




Yet you staunchly oppose any talk about changes to super taxation or the pension.

Maybe people get angry over Govt cuts when they're based on ideology.  maybe people get angry when they spent 3 years hearing an opposition leader tell them about honesty and integrity and that they will say what they'll do, and do what they said and promised, to only then have just about every one of those promises broken.

I'm hopefully that MT is moving along the lines of building consensus, of attacking some of the lower hanging fruit in terms of removing distorting tax policies.  I believe people will accept sacrifice, but only when they know everyone is sharing the burden.  Abbott mark I type budgets are not that, hopefully the MT mini budget review will be a centrist reform based policy.  Les ideology and a lot more reality in the decision making would be a good start.

As for your brother, it's unfortunate that doctors are so scared of litigation these days that they will often order more tests than required, and will generally not say no when a patient wants a certain type of care.  Who's more at fault, the Govt, doctors, or your brother?



sptrawler said:


> You know as well as I, that I'm personally against an increase in population, until it can be afforded, as it will result in a lowered living standard.
> That doesn't change the fact, that both Labor and the Coalition are pushing for it, as we do have a falling birth rate.




What does it matter if we have a falling birth rate?  the PC has already shown that importing people doesn't help with the aging of the population, so there's really no need to bring in something like 2 A380 worth of people every day.  1 or 2 a week might be a more appropriate level.



sptrawler said:


> Anyway like I said, we agree on most things, other than welfare, so that's not too bad.




Except you're focused more on spending, while I think until you resolve a lot of the tax expenditures, the lack of equity that has built up with the taxation system will make reform much harder.


----------



## sptrawler (3 October 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> The income tax cuts provided by the Howard Govt, combined with the halving of CGT, tax free super, halving of the pension assets test taper were not affordable over the long term.  As soon as the ToT started to revert to the long term mean deficits were assured.



They were affordable then, they were running surpluses and releasing money back to the workers, when the first wave of the mining boom and revenue was waning. Which is what they are trying to stimulate now, with the same idea.

The tax free super allowed old people who had no super, the opportunity to liquidate assetts and  put their money in super, thereby start to reduce the dependence on the pension.
This was done at a time, when the first wave of baby boomers were coming through, some would see it as a clever move. As it put their money into a Government controlled enviroment.

How these were handled post Howard/Costello can't be placed at their feet, along with no changes to negative gearing, no changes to CGT, no changes to anything.
Well maybe you can, but I certainly can't, same as all of a sudden it is Abbott's fault, there is no changes to taxing, you maybe can reconcile 6 years of Labor ineptitude I can't.
I'm not saying Abbott made any better a fist of it, but Rudd/ Gillard/ Rudd, were worse they didn't even acknowledge the problem.




sydboy007 said:


> Do you accept that interest rates were at the highest in a generation due to the tax cuts that Howard forced through?  An economically rational person wouldn't add fuel to the inflation fire, but that's what Howard did.  How much did 2% of mortgage interest rate rises suck from the economy?  How much did that add to the personal debt pile that increased by 100% of GDP over the Howard Govt.




No I don't accept that interest rates were at the highest in a generation, I'm still of working age and I paid my house off at 18%. 
So if the long term average for Australia is 7 - 8% a top out at 12% isn't bad.
Everyone is much more worried about Labors inactivity, causing interest rates to go down to 0%, that is much more scary.



sydboy007 said:


> I'm not arguing that we should have got no income tax cuts, but the budget was sent into a structural deficit by the hollowing out of revenue.




Which if everyone had a crystal ball, the cuts may not have been so large.

How about if they cut out NG and CGT, then in two years we are in the greatest recession we have ever had, housing is the only thing propping up our economy.

What if it sends us into an absolute tailspin.
What do you say then? Oh fff maybe that wasn't so clever.
Look how much flak Howard and Costello cop, ten years later, when they were running a surplus.




sydboy007 said:


> Yet you staunchly oppose any talk about changes to super taxation or the pension.




That is just an outright lie. 

I've agreed with you that there should be a re introduction of RBL's . 
Also I've said, as you know, it would be easy to apply the same tax regime on those over 60, as is applied to those between 55 and 60, which I am. They already have the system in place.

So really that was just a nasty cheap shot, with no truth. 




sydboy007 said:


> Maybe people get angry over Govt cuts when they're based on ideology.  maybe people get angry when they spent 3 years hearing an opposition leader tell them about honesty and integrity and that they will say what they'll do, and do what they said and promised, to only then have just about every one of those promises broken.




Maybe they do, but the fact remains, any system needs reviewing especially as the means of funding it become harder.
If you want to reduce the tax on the productive side of the economy, and increase the spending on the non productive side, you have to tax the benign sector harder.
This will be a limited resource and will run out, then you are back to the original problem.




sydboy007 said:


> I believe people will accept sacrifice, but only when they know everyone is sharing the burden.




That is a given, as long as everyone is aware of ALL the ramifications, currently only half the story is being told.IMO




sydboy007 said:


> As for your brother, it's unfortunate that doctors are so scared of litigation these days that they will often order more tests than required, and will generally not say no when a patient wants a certain type of care.  Who's more at fault, the Govt, doctors, or your brother?




It isn't my brother, it is my brother in law, but as I was saying, it is still money that shouldn't be spent. The same as a lot of other services in other spheres.
But it still is funded by our taxes, yours and mine. Or by your loss of services, when you become old enough to need them.




sydboy007 said:


> What does it matter if we have a falling birth rate?  the PC has already shown that importing people doesn't help with the aging of the population, so there's really no need to bring in something like 2 A380 worth of people every day.  1 or 2 a week might be a more appropriate level.




Absolutely and allowing mass economic migration, as happened here under Labor and is happening in Europe, is ridiculous. 
It will just cripple those Countries, that the refugees demand to go to, much better they lift the standard in their own Country. But that requires a certain mind set, some lack.



sydboy007 said:


> Except you're focused more on spending, while I think until you resolve a lot of the tax expenditures, the lack of equity that has built up with the taxation system will make reform much harder.




I'm not focused more on spending at all, I'm just old enough, have seen enough and lived through enough hardship. I know there is too sides to it, it doesn't matter how much money you make, if you spend more than you earn you end up in the $hit.

I hope I've made it clear. 
I don't mind sensible tax cuts, but it has to go hand in hand with sensible spending cuts, living a champagne lifestyle on beer money doesn't work.

Anyway, we've been over this time after time, people are probably bored. I am


----------



## SirRumpole (4 October 2015)

> Winding back negative gearing and capital gains tax breaks, may be a good idea and I've agreed with you. However, if it was easy to impliment with no adverse effects, Labor would have introduced it. The tax incentives were introduced for a reason, from memory, it was to stimulate investment and risk.




NG and super concessions were introduced to give people on high incomes a tax break without looking as though it was a tax break.

Labor didn't reverse those because they have their snouts in the trough as well, although it is now good to see Bowen et al bringing up the subject again.


----------



## sptrawler (4 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> NG and super concessions were introduced to give people on high incomes a tax break without looking as though it was a tax break.
> 
> Labor didn't reverse those because they have their snouts in the trough as well, although it is now good to see Bowen et al bringing up the subject again.




As per usual another ridiculous statement.

In July 1985, the Hawke/Keating government quarantined negative gearing interest expenses (on new transactions), so interest could only be claimed against rental income, not other income. (Any excess could be carried forward for use in later years.) *What is less appreciated is that Hawke/Keating introduced negative gearing only six months prior.
*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_gearing

Also you may have forgotten but they also brought in super.


----------



## Logique (4 October 2015)

A dark day for free speech in this country. 

And that climate scientist who found that the IPCC modelling has over-estimated the role of carbon dioxide in climate warming by 5 to 10 times - he better watch out. If he leaves the country, Minister Dutton, cowed by the _Twitterati_, mightn't let him back in..

Respect (ideologically approved) free speech, and the (ideologically approved) science, seems to be the way of it.



> http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...re_we_so_afraid_of_an_anti_abortion_activist/
> Why are we so afraid of an anti-abortion activist?
> 
> Miranda Devine - Saturday, October 03, 2015
> ...


----------



## noco (4 October 2015)

Logique said:


> A dark day for free speech in this country.
> 
> And that climate scientist who found that the IPCC modelling has over-estimated the role of carbon dioxide in climate warming by 5 to 10 times - he better watch out. If he leaves the country, Minister Dutton, cowed by the _Twitterati_, mightn't let him back in..
> 
> Respect (ideologically approved) free speech, and the (ideologically approved) science, seems to be the way of it.





logique, I am pleased to see I am not the only one who believes this Global Warming stunt is a farce ......some so called "AUTHORITIES" and would be scientists have pulled the wool over the eyes of the naive far too long.


----------



## basilio (4 October 2015)

Well Logique and Noco you can find one creative climate denier,  Dr David Evans, and one BS mouthpiece  Miranda Devine and you want the rest of climate science to be ditched forthwith.  

I wonder where the the peer reviewed paper is to back up this piece of fancy ? You know where he lays out the maths, the research and the evidence to his hypothesis so that other scientists can examine it carefully. That's the money shot guys. That's when you know that a scientist has cottoned onto something significant.


----------



## basilio (4 October 2015)

Have to say Malcom Turnballs approach to the 15 year old kid who killed the policeman as a terrorist act is spot on. Light years of difference to Tony Abbotts bludgeoning of the whole Muslim community.

Be interesting to see what the hard right make of it.



> *Malcolm Turnbull picks up phone to Muslim leaders after Parramatta shooting*
> 
> Date
> October 4, 2015 - 1:45PM
> ...




http://www.canberratimes.com.au/fed...fter-parramatta-shooting-20151004-gk0ruz.html


----------



## McLovin (4 October 2015)

Logique said:


> A dark day for free speech in this country.




Hmm....



> In 2003, Newman spoke out against the execution of Paul Jennings Hill, who murdered abortion provider Dr. John Britton and his bodyguard James Barrett in 1994. In a press release, he said, “Florida judge denied Rev. Hill his right to present a defense that claimed that the* killing of the abortionist was necessary to save the lives of the pre-born babies that were scheduled to be killed by abortion that day…. There are many examples where taking the life in defense of innocent human beings is legally justified and permissible under the law*.”




I get the feeling that if his name wasn't Newman but was, say, Abdullah, and he was invoking his religion to justify the murder of an innocent person the outcry over freedom of speech would be far more muted.


----------



## Tink (4 October 2015)

Well said, Logique, and good on Miranda Devine for saying it as it is  

Meanwhile, back in Melbourne, Deakin University is running a Muslim Workshop, for the weekend.
*
Extremist Muslim workshops*
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...eakin-university/story-e6frg6nf-1227554797893

_Dubbed “The Art of Da’wah” and hosted by the ultraconservative Salafist organisation’s president Waseem Razvi, the workshops, to be held at Deakin’s Burwood campus, promise to use the teachings of Dr Naik and Sheik Deedat to help attendees “learn the art and gain the confidence to talk about Islam to anyone, anywhere and at any time”.

Indian “televangelist” Dr Naik has been banned from countries including Britain, Canada and parts of India for his rhetorical support for terrorist leader Osama bin Laden._

So while our ruling elites were banning baby-savers, they did nothing to prevent a conference of radical Muslims from taking place this same weekend.


----------



## bellenuit (4 October 2015)

basilio said:


> Have to say Malcom Turnballs approach to the 15 year old kid who killed the policeman as a terrorist act is spot on. Light years of difference to Tony Abbotts bludgeoning of the whole Muslim community.





I have little time for Abbott and am glad he is gone, but I have not ever heard Abbott bludgeon the whole Muslim community. That is a narrative the Left likes to promote, but I have found Abbott's responses to all such incidents to date considerate and non-divisive. It is usually the Left's response to Abbott's responses that have tried to create mistrust and division by attributing to his remarks innuendo that was never there.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 October 2015)

bellenuit said:


> I have little time for Abbott and am glad he is gone, but I have not ever heard Abbott bludgeon the whole Muslim community. That is a narrative the Left likes to promote, but I have found Abbott's responses to all such incidents to date considerate and non-divisive. It is usually the Left's response to Abbott's responses that have tried to create mistrust and division by attributing to his remarks innuendo that was never there.




I'm not sure that Abbott ever actually reached out to the Muslim community though. But whatever, it's going to be a fine line that Turnbull now has to walk. Trying to quell community outrage against Muslims while still trying to convince the public that they are being protected.

First the Lindt siege, now the Parramatta shooting, the public will want a few answers as to why these sort of things won't happen again and what the government will do to make sure they don't.


----------



## basilio (4 October 2015)

Well Rumpole et al if you read the story you can see what Malcolm, the Police and the Muslim community are going to do. It will essentially be a process of involving the Muslim community in recognising  radicalisation of people and being prepared to  stop or report it.

This time it looks as if the Muslim community believe the government is serious about supporting them in this effort.  Under Tony Abbott the impression was he didn't trust them as afar as he could throw them and privately wished they would just all go away.  ( Which I suppose is the fervent wish of many people)

And the  suggested alternative to this approach is what exactly ? Anything constructive or feasible ?  Or do we stick to demonising the entire Muslim population as a matter of principle  and then wonder why some of them become antsy ?

____________________________________________________________

From Canberra Times



> At a time when social cohesion and public confidence in multiculturalism could be expected to come under renewed strain, Turnbull emphasised its value, and went further, issuing a public plea for even greater solidarity with Australians of Muslim faith.
> 
> An emergency phone hook-up with federal and state police and political leaders also included key Muslim community figures. Acting on the advice of his security agencies and his extremely well dialled-in Assistant Minister for Multiculturalism, Concetta Fierravanti-Wells, *Turnbull is determined to reassure Muslim Australians that they play a vital role in community safety, that their government in no way holds them responsible for the actions of extremists, and that they too can be victims of fanaticism.*
> 
> ...



http://www.canberratimes.com.au/fed...ing-part-of-new-approach-20151004-gk0svl.html


----------



## sptrawler (4 October 2015)

basilio said:


> Well Rumpole et al if you read the story you can see what Malcolm, the Police and the Muslim community are going to do. It will essentially be a process of involving the Muslim community in recognising  radicalisation of people and being prepared to  stop or report it.
> 
> This time it looks as if the Muslim community believe the government is serious about supporting them in this effort.  Under Tony Abbott the impression was he didn't trust them as afar as he could throw them and privately wished they would just all go away.  ( Which I suppose is the fervent wish of many people)
> 
> ...




Or maybe, it is just being reported in a more Coalition friendly manner, who knows? 
That is the problem with the media, once people lose faith in the accuracy of the content.

Time, incidents and actions, will tell the story. 
Unfortunately I for one have very little trust, in what the media, has to say.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 October 2015)

> And the suggested alternative to this approach is what exactly ? Anything constructive or feasible ? Or do we stick to demonising the entire Muslim population as a matter of principle and then wonder why some of them become antsy ?




Cooperation first, intelligence second.

Given that the Muslim leadership does not want to be banned from advocating terrorism why should they be trusted ?



> Australia's terrorism laws 'could criminalise preaching from Qur'an'
> 
> National imams council tells parliamentary committee that Muslim preachers on social justice could face charges
> 
> ...


----------



## luutzu (4 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I'm not sure that Abbott ever actually reached out to the Muslim community though. But whatever, it's going to be a fine line that Turnbull now has to walk. Trying to quell community outrage against Muslims while still trying to convince the public that they are being protected.
> 
> First the Lindt siege, now the Parramatta shooting, the public will want a few answers as to why these sort of things won't happen again and what the government will do to make sure they don't.




Not easy being a Muslim. Whenever any criminal or terrorist or killer commit anything wrong, the whole entire group have to explains and defend and beg for forgiveness. 

We don't even blame the brother of the parents or the cousins of any other criminals, but terrorism... They're all into it.

You think the brass and little Napoleons in Canberra n Washington care about the safety of its citizens?


----------



## SirRumpole (4 October 2015)

luutzu said:


> Not easy being a Muslim. Whenever any criminal or terrorist or killer commit anything wrong, the whole entire group have to explains and defend and beg for forgiveness.
> 
> We don't even blame the brother of the parents or the cousins of any other criminals, but terrorism... They're all into it.




The terrorism is the result of an ideology most likely subscribed to by the brothers & sisters, mothers and fathers.



> You think the brass and little Napoleons in Canberra n Washington care about the safety of its citizens?




Probably not as much as they care about their own safety, but at least we can vote and throw them out.


----------



## sptrawler (4 October 2015)

luutzu said:


> Not easy being a Muslim. Whenever any criminal or terrorist or killer commit anything wrong, the whole entire group have to explains and defend and beg for forgiveness.
> 
> We don't even blame the brother of the parents or the cousins of any other criminals, but terrorism... They're all into it.
> 
> You think the brass and little Napoleons in Canberra n Washington care about the safety of its citizens?




Well you have to look at the flip side, when a white 'christian' dude ran amok in Port Arthur, the Government took all the guns off the law abiding citizens.

So don't think the Muslims are being dealt a $hit hand, I would say they are being treated with 'kid gloves', when you take into consideration their track record. 

If it was a bikie, that had carried out the shooting, all hell would have broken out, as it should have.

Just my opinion.


----------



## luutzu (5 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> The terrorism is the result of an ideology most likely subscribed to by the brothers & sisters, mothers and fathers.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably not as much as they care about their own safety, but at least we can vote and throw them out.




Terrorism is act of war conducted at soft targets by weak armies or their sympathisers. To quote Sun Tzu, there are only two methods in war - the direct and the indirect. Terrorism is part of the latter and done against us. 

What we do to others are considered keeping peace and stability, and horror of flatten buildings and body parts and dead innocents are casualties of war, are collateral damages. 

All countries n all armies throughout history define it as such, what does Islam or Chdistianity got to do with it?

Want to resolve terrorism, have to know its root causes. Can't expect to flatten towns and drone evil doers and get no blowback do we?

As an NSA whistleblower once observed, tragedies like 911 is a boon for the Hawks at all military and security agencies. They'll get all the money they need, job security n promotion. And politicians can point to these and say see, that's why we have to fight them first. 

In the end, innocents get kill and children of the poor goes off to fight while at home the treasury is emptied and a few well placed people get very very rich.


----------



## luutzu (5 October 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Well you have to look at the flip side, when a white 'christian' dude ran amok in Port Arthur, the Government took all the guns off the law abiding citizens.
> 
> So don't think the Muslims are being dealt a $hit hand, I would say they are being treated with 'kid gloves', when you take into consideration their track record.
> 
> ...




When the Muslim ran amok the govt take all the rights n privacy of all its citizens. 

When corporations ran amok and being the country to the brink, the govt dig deep into our pocket n give them money.


----------



## noco (5 October 2015)

luutzu said:


> When the Muslim ran amok the govt take all the rights n privacy of all its citizens.
> 
> When corporations ran amok and being the country to the brink, the govt dig deep into our pocket n give them money.




Only the Labor Party Governments do that like the overseas car manufacturing corporates  ....and the ship builders in SA...The Labor Party do it to appease the unions.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 October 2015)

> Want to resolve terrorism, have to know its root causes. Can't expect to flatten towns and drone evil doers and get no blowback do we?




It is ISIS and its derivatives that are destroying towns and killing innocent people.

You would prefer that they won and spread their terrorism to the rest of the world ?


----------



## luutzu (5 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> It is ISIS and its derivatives that are destroying towns and killing innocent people.
> 
> You would prefer that they won and spread their terrorism to the rest of the world ?




ISIS weren't around until only a few years ago right. They managed to form because the countries are ata wars right?

Heard from this ME expert, Scahill (?), that IS is more than just those looney religious nuts, OK looney Islamic nuts, with knives. 

A large part of what we call IS is not religious, not to that extend, but Sunni militias led by this secular general and other senior military Ppl who couldn't find jobs under Bush at first then got bought back in under Petraus but then kick out again under Obamas admin pick of Shiite govt.

So what our dear leaders call IS is a bunch of groups joining forces. Anyway, it's more complicated.

Heck even the Russians are bombing IS and we could kinda quess their IS is not the same as our IS.

How are they or anyone going to spread terror? While there are exceptions, it is generally the case that you'd need to pay your army and recruits so that they'd fight and die and spread terror for you. Those stuff don't come cheap.

You know what's scary? With Russia now directly involved fighting ISIS, accidents between our bombs and their troops or their jets and our jets... Those kind of death won't end with and investigation or an oops man.


----------



## luutzu (5 October 2015)

noco said:


> Only the Labor Party Governments do that like the overseas car manufacturing corporates  ....and the ship builders in SA...The Labor Party do it to appease the unions.




I thought they did it to keep those jobs in manufacturing. While I don't think it's good idea to fund corporations like that, it's also not good to close up shop and tell Aussie workers to head to China or. Japan for those Aussie funded manufacturing jobs ey.

How's the Liberal repeal of the mining super profit tax going? Can't tax miners when they're raking it in -else will lose jobs and stuff. Can't tax them when they're doing it tough and firing a bunch of people. Heck can't tax them past couple of years when they write down their assets and report "losses" either. 

If I don't know better I'd think our govt works for big businesses but paid for my the plebs


----------



## SirRumpole (5 October 2015)

luutzu said:


> If I don't know better I'd think our govt works for big businesses but paid for my the plebs




Well I think you might be right there.



Just think what they did to the rooftop solar industry. 

Rooftop solar was becoming too successful in reducing the demand for power and therefore the profits of the coal industry.

The Libs solution, take subsidies away from solar, get rid of the revenue that did it, and instead give our money to polluters to keep polluting.

The Party of the "individual" and small business took money away from individuals and all those rooftop solar small businesses and gave it to big business.

Totally stupid in financial and carbon reduction terms.

Hypocrites.


----------



## luutzu (5 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Well I think you might be right there.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




We got a total of $50 selling our solar to them for 3 months. Our bill after that is  500.

I checked before n our panels actually produced very close to what we use every quarter, only a few bucks less if they buy at at same rate they're selling. 

No wonder there's all these ads to not waste our roof. 

I haven't dug but from what I read, the Barangaroo development is another example of taxpayers paying for stuff they don't need, hardly use, add value to the rich but sold as a public good.

 I mean the parkland near the new casinos n multi million dollar  apartments. All talk about returning that park all landscaped and nice back to the public and what a beauty it is. 

I'd be knocked off my socks if Packer or the developers there pay for any of that - it's public so why should they. So we fork out loads if cash for parkland we might drop by if we get lost and developers can jack up their price a couple of mill because look at the park and the view that comes with the apartment!

If politicians are looking after public interests, that kind of stuff won't be happening.


----------



## sydboy007 (5 October 2015)

if this turns out to be true, and now that it's be reported it will hopefully not see the light of day, then MT is trully livign up to Abbott in that his policies are practically the same

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...g-unions-racist-20151002-gk0g8n#ixzz3nd6VUAi4



> The couple are watching the union attack ads on TV with the man’s parents.
> 
> Father: They’re at it again
> 
> ...




We need a law that requires all publicly funded advertising to be based purely on factual information.  The above would be publicly funded partisan propaganda.  To deny there are legitimate questions surrounding the ChAFTA is to treat the public as idiots.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 October 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> if this turns out to be true, and now that it's be reported it will hopefully not see the light of day, then MT is trully livign up to Abbott in that his policies are practically the same
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...g-unions-racist-20151002-gk0g8n#ixzz3nd6VUAi4
> 
> ...




Sorry to disappoint you Syd, but the article says that the ads will be paid for by the Victorian Liberal Party.

That doesn't take away from the fact that what the ads say is b.s.


----------



## noco (5 October 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> if this turns out to be true, and now that it's be reported it will hopefully not see the light of day, then MT is trully livign up to Abbott in that his policies are practically the same
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...g-unions-racist-20151002-gk0g8n#ixzz3nd6VUAi4
> 
> ...





So are you saying that Bob Hawke, Paul Keating, Bob Carr, Martin Ferguson, Dan Andrews, Mike Foley, Jay Wetherall and Anatazia Palszczuk are all idiots?


After all, they are your comrades.


----------



## sptrawler (5 October 2015)

It's good to see that the Government, is spending $1.3 billion on a Bendigo light armoured vehicle, to replace the Land Rovers.
The EPA must have been on the army's back, about the amount of oil the Land Rovers leak.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-...et-to-spend-13bn-on-new-army-vehicles/6827164


----------



## SirRumpole (5 October 2015)

sptrawler said:


> It's good to see that the Government, is spending $1.3 billion on a Bendigo light armoured vehicle, to replace the Land Rovers.
> The EPA must have been on the army's back, about the amount of oil the Land Rovers leak.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-...et-to-spend-13bn-on-new-army-vehicles/6827164




There could be a market for a civilian version. 

a la Jeeps & Hummers.


----------



## sptrawler (5 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> There could be a market for a civilian version.
> 
> Where did Jeep come from ?




If it's anything like my Jeep, the dealers workshop.

Only joking it has been a good car, and as you said, it may lead to more sales.


----------



## sydboy007 (5 October 2015)

noco said:


> So are you saying that Bob Hawke, Paul Keating, Bob Carr, Martin Ferguson, Dan Andrews, Mike Foley, Jay Wetherall and Anatazia Palszczuk are all idiots?
> 
> 
> After all, they are your comrades.




Noco, do you agree with the chinese investing in a project and being able to bring in the majority of workers from China to build and possibly run the project?

Do you understand that currently the Govt is proposing to allow waivers on market testing for Chinese investors.  This is something no other country receives.

I'm scared that you are so happy to endorse Australia being turned into a Chinese colony, but I expect better from our politicians.


----------



## sptrawler (6 October 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Noco, do you agree with the chinese investing in a project and being able to bring in the majority of workers from China to build and possibly run the project?
> 
> Do you understand that currently the Govt is proposing to allow waivers on market testing for Chinese investors.  This is something no other country receives.
> 
> I'm scared that you are so happy to endorse Australia being turned into a Chinese colony, but I expect better from our politicians.




I understand your concerns and I think they are justified. 
However the world is moving on, if we want to maintain a first world standard of living and welfare, it has to be funded.
During the resources boom, the unions IMO, should have looked at it as an opportunity to up skill our workforce and provide work opportunities for the unemployed and disadvantaged.

I didn't see union funded advertising campaigns, suggesting any of the above, they were too busy killing the 'pig'.

Now the 'good times' have stopped, it is business as usual for the unions, bag anything that stops the gravy train.

The problem is, we have become a very expensive country to start businesses in, especially when major construction is involved.

If Australia wants money to fund our lifestyle, there has to be something in it for the investor.

We seem to be too focused on, we want it, we deserve it, why can't we have it?

It is everyone else's problem, we're happy with the money we earn, we're happy with the lifestyle, what is the problem?

Why do people keep talking about deficits, unsustainable welfare and all the other boring crap.


----------



## sptrawler (6 October 2015)

sptrawler said:


> I always like your take on things, it is an interesting angle and as usual there is a lot of truth in it as in most peoples comments.
> 
> Immigration is an issue in all Western Countries, as generally they all have a falling birth rate, therefore most population growth comes from immigration.
> 
> ...




Just to support the post I made.

I see this today.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-...isory-committee-rejects-cashless-welf/6830742

It is very difficult to change things, when they are entrenched, that goes for all levels of society.

The norm is, to find more tax, to support it. 

That doesn't only apply to article, it applies to all levels of our society, we like it we want to keep it, but we can't afford it.

What did CCR say " There's a bad moon on the rise".


----------



## noco (6 October 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Noco, do you agree with the chinese investing in a project and being able to bring in the majority of workers from China to build and possibly run the project?
> 
> Do you understand that currently the Govt is proposing to allow waivers on market testing for Chinese investors.  This is something no other country receives.
> 
> I'm scared that you are so happy to endorse Australia being turned into a Chinese colony, but I expect better from our politicians.




The ones the Chinese will bring in is the top management and supervision and the CFMEU know this only too well.....The same scrutiny applies as it stands for 457 visa's....Any tradesman with have to pass the test.

You are fantasizing  ....it ain't gonna happen......No good trying to convince me.....you have to convince Bob Hawke, Simon Crean, Paul Keating, Martin Ferguson, Mike Foley, Danial Andrews, Anatazia Palaszczuk, Jay Wetheral and Bob Carr.

Stop listening to Bill Shorten and your CFMEU comrades....It is political and point scoring with those idiots.


----------



## sptrawler (7 October 2015)

sydboy007 said:


> Noco, do you agree with the chinese investing in a project and being able to bring in the majority of workers from China to build and possibly run the project?
> 
> Do you understand that currently the Govt is proposing to allow waivers on market testing for Chinese investors.  This is something no other country receives.
> 
> I'm scared that you are so happy to endorse Australia being turned into a Chinese colony, but I expect better from our politicians.




Maybe you could check out Citic Pacific sino steel project in NW of WA. 
I'm not sure how it all is set up, but if this is still running, I don't see how a FTA is a problem.

You somehow seem to think, that we own the companies that already work here?

I worked in a power station, 30 years ago, that brought in most of the technical people from Toshiba, to install and commission the turbine/generator and control DCS.

Do you realise, Switzerland has had a free trade agreement with China for two years. I'm not saying it is good or bad, but others are moving on.

We can no doubt sit back and say, no way ho zay, we aren't going to do anything, see how that works.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 October 2015)

Does CHAFTA and TPP have any "sunset clause" Or does it bind us forever more ?


----------



## Tisme (7 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Does CHAFTA and TPP have any "sunset clause" Or does it bind us forever more ?




TPP has to get past the up coming elections in the other countries, where most of the candidates oppose the pact.


----------



## sptrawler (7 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Does CHAFTA and TPP have any "sunset clause" Or does it bind us forever more ?




I would think an agreement, is only an agreement, while the parties agree.

My guess is, there would be nothing other than an intent to comply, binding them. 
There is also no international body, that I've heard of, that can force a country to comply with a trade agreement.

One would think the only reason for the trade agreement, is to improve the trading position of all parties, a bit of give and take. Well that's my understanding.


----------



## Tisme (7 October 2015)

TPP Hurdles:

Clicky on pic


----------



## Tisme (9 October 2015)

Some benchmarks Malcolm can try to better:

Average quarterly growth of real GDP

Abbott:           0.64%
Rudd/Gillard:   0.61%
Howard:          0.89%
Hawke/Keating: 0.92%
Fraser:            0.59%


----------



## noco (9 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> Some benchmarks Malcolm can try to better:
> 
> Average quarterly growth of real GDP
> 
> ...




Now lets give a bit of thought to those figures.

Who would you say would have had the hardest time getting their percentage under the conditions of operation.


----------



## Tisme (9 October 2015)

noco said:


> Now lets give a bit of thought to those figures.
> 
> Who would you say would have had the hardest time getting their percentage under the conditions of operation.





I'm happy for you to weight them based on worldwide influences e.g. recessionary pressures, however it still poses a task for Malcolm.....we all know wages have been going backwards for the last 4 years so eventually the elasticity will catch up unless the economy is refocused to something we can actually build on e.g. value add industry


----------



## noco (9 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> I'm happy for you to* weight* them based on worldwide influences e.g. recessionary pressures, however it still poses a task for Malcolm.....we all know wages have been going backwards for the last 4 years so eventually the elasticity will catch up unless the economy is refocused to something we can actually build on e.g. value add industry




Do you mean wait?....But under the circumstances, and I was only referring to the names you mentioned and not the future.

But wouldn't you say that Abbott has had the roughest time of all those you listed?


----------



## explod (10 October 2015)

noco said:


> Do you mean wait?....But under the circumstances, and I was only referring to the names you mentioned and not the future.
> 
> But wouldn't you say that Abbott has had the roughest time of all those you listed?




Move on noco,  only today and the future exists.


----------



## noco (10 October 2015)

explod said:


> Move on noco,  only today and the future exists.




:topic


----------



## wayneL (10 October 2015)

explod said:


> Move on noco,  only today and the future exists.




Yeah but the future ain't what it used to be. (h/t Yogi Berra)


----------



## Knobby22 (11 October 2015)

wayneL said:


> Yeah but the future ain't what it used to be. (h/t Yogi Berra)




I never said most of the things I said.

Yogi Berra


----------



## SirRumpole (12 October 2015)

Ian Verrender has some scathing things to say about the TPP.

It could be a millstone around our neck for a long time.


We've been sold out by the TPP sham



> The Trans-Pacific Partnership isn't about trade and it's certainly not about free trade. It's about entrenching the interests of major corporations at the expense of ordinary citizens, writes Ian Verrender.
> 
> Where is Cleisthenes when you really need him?
> 
> ...


----------



## Tisme (12 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Ian Verrender has some scathing things to say about the TPP.
> 
> It could be a millstone around our neck for a long time.
> 
> ...




Leopard and spots?

Remember the Clinton smoke and mirrors Globalisation agenda that managed to soak money from everywhere and funnel it into the USA to end up a surplus for three years? Sun Tzu would be proud of Bill .... as was the cigar industry.


----------



## Tisme (12 October 2015)

Turnbull versus Howard:


----------



## Tisme (14 October 2015)

I'm guessing all the LNP fans out there are celebrating the switching on of the big brother surveillance network. I expect every Lib and Nationals party faithful to play the rules and not use any "in private" browsers, etc. 

I guess I should pull my digit out and find some cloaking software for my phone texts and discussion board posts. Any non Lib tragics recommend any apps?


----------



## noco (14 October 2015)

More Labor gutter tactics in an attempt to discredit Malcolm Turnbull but as per usual it has back fired on Labor.

Read the reader comments. 


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-what-we-learned/story-fn59niix-1227569011587


Question Time: what we learned


https://plus.google.com/101091338212849916588

*Chris Bowen questioned Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull about tax havens. Picture: Kym Smith

There were 21 questions in Question Time today but only three that really mattered, and all came down to a single issue: whether the Prime Minister is a tax evader. The one thing we learned is that Malcolm Turnbull has put his leadership on the line with his statement to parliament that he is paying Australian tax in full.

1. Malcolm Turnbull insists he has no say in where a managed fund puts his money

Labor prepared the ground for its attack on Turnbull by noting in the Senate that some of the Prime Minister’s personal investments are in global funds that have offices registered in the Cayman Islands. NSW Labor Senator Sam Dastyari fired the first shots here.

but the real attack came in Question Time. Labor treasury spokesman Chris Bowen asked Turnbull if he agreed with the Australian Tax Office that the Cayman Islands was a tax haven. Turnbull replied with an assurance: he and his wife, Lucy, have put much of their money into global funds so they have no say over what companies it is invested in. The use of the Cayman Islands means that everything they earn on the funds is taxed in full in Australia. “The income of the fund is taxed in the hands of the investors in their own home jurisdictions, so the fact is that all of my or Lucy’s income from investments, including funds which are registered in the Cayman Islands, is taxed in full in Australia,” Turnbull said.*






Chris Bowen questioned Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull about tax havens. Picture: Kym Smith

There were 21 questions in Question Time today but only three that really mattered, and all came down to a single issue: whether the Prime Minister is a tax evader. The one thing we learned is that Malcolm Turnbull has put his leadership on the line with his statement to parliament that he is paying Australian tax in full.

1. Malcolm Turnbull insists he has no say in where a managed fund puts his money

Labor prepared the ground for its attack on Turnbull by noting in the Senate that some of the Prime Minister’s personal investments are in global funds that have offices registered in the Cayman Islands. NSW Labor Senator Sam Dastyari fired the first shots here.

but the real attack came in Question Time. Labor treasury spokesman Chris Bowen asked Turnbull if he agreed with the Australian Tax Office that the Cayman Islands was a tax haven. Turnbull replied with an assurance: he and his wife, Lucy, have put much of their money into global funds so they have no say over what companies it is invested in. The use of the Cayman Islands means that everything they earn on the funds is taxed in full in Australia. “The income of the fund is taxed in the hands of the investors in their own home jurisdictions, so the fact is that all of my or Lucy’s income from investments, including funds which are registered in the Cayman Islands, is taxed in full in Australia,” Turnbull said.


Turnbull defends Cayman Islands tax haven investments

2. Malcolm Turnbull declares he pays tax “in full”

In round two of its attack, Labor’s Tony Burke asked Turnbull if the earnings on his funds were higher because they were based in the Cayman Islands. Turnbull sneered at Burke’s “inability to understand the way in which these funds operate” and insisted again that he paid his taxes: “The fact is that all of my and my wife’s income from managed funds is taxed in Australia and all of that income is taxed here in full.” The Labor attack seemed to falter at this point, as Bill Shorten conferred with his colleagues on where to go next.


Labor questions Turnbull over the dates he invested in managed funds

3. Malcolm Turnbull suggests there is nothing suspect about the Cayman Islands

*Labor’s final round came in the last question of the day, when legal affairs spokesman Mark Dreyfus noted that one of the funds used by Turnbull was the Zebedee Growth Fund, which happens to be based in a building in the Cayman Islands that Barack Obama had labelled “one of the largest tax scams” in the world. Turnbull gave no quarter on the clear suggestion his money should not be in the Cayman Islands at all. Instead he argued that thousands of funds used the Caymans, including superannuation funds that Labor MPs were likely to use. And the result, he said, was that all the tax was paid back home. “The consequence of that arrangement is that all of that income that accrues to my share of the investment is brought to account fully, and tax is paid on it fully, in Australia,” Turnbull said. “So the fact is that all of that income, all of my share of the income, is fully taxed in Australia. And that is the point. So no Australian tax is avoided. Australian tax is paid in full.”*

Labor questions PM Turnbull over Zebedee Growth Fund investment

The verdict: A win for Turnbull

Labor proved nothing new in its attacks today. There was no smoking gun and no proof of wrongdoing. Voters already know (or should by now) that the Prime Minister is immensely rich. And the rules against double taxation are clear: if he pays tax on all his global investments in Australia, he shouldn’t have to pay tax on the same earnings in the US (or anywhere else) as well. But everything comes down to Turnbull’s statement that his taxes are “paid in full” in Australia. Any mistake on that front means he has misled parliament. Turnbull fended off the attack, but will have to tread carefully as more questions come.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 October 2015)

noco said:


> “The income of the fund is taxed in the hands of the investors in their own home jurisdictions, so the fact is that all of my or Lucy’s income from investments, including funds which are registered in the Cayman Islands, is taxed in full in Australia,” Turnbull said.[/B]




Not being an accountant, but if Mal and Lucy decided not to take any income from those funds untill they retired to the Cayman Islands, they would essentially be getting their income from those funds tax free ?


----------



## McLovin (14 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Not being an accountant, but if Mal and Lucy decided not to take any income from those funds untill they retired to the Cayman Islands, they would essentially be getting their income from those funds tax free ?




No.

They pay tax as its earnt inside the fund. This is really the ALP in the gutter. I have a pretty low opinion of Dastyari and it's fallen further.


----------



## Tisme (14 October 2015)

McLovin said:


> This is really the ALP in the gutter. .




Yeah it's 5hitty politics and juvenile IMO. They seem to be out of step with their perceived audience = 1950's struggle street families.


----------



## drsmith (14 October 2015)

McLovin said:


> No.
> 
> They pay tax as its earnt inside the fund. This is really the ALP in the gutter. I have a pretty low opinion of Dastyari and it's fallen further.



I think young Samuel had to come out from behind parliamentary privilege to open fire on this one.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 October 2015)

Although this is a NT government decision, the Feds really should step in as a matter of national security.

Selling defence related assets to China really is stupid.

Senior Defence official raises security concerns over Darwin port sale to Chinese-owned company Landbridge



> There are concerns at the highest levels of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) about the sale of the Port of Darwin to a Chinese-owned company.
> 
> The Northern Territory Government has signed a $506 million dollar deal with Landbridge Group to lease the port and facilities of East Arm Wharf, including the Darwin Marine Supply Base, and Fort Hill for 99 years.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tisme (15 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Although this is a NT government decision, the Feds really should step in as a matter of national security.
> 
> Selling defence related assets to China really is stupid.
> 
> Senior Defence official raises security concerns over Darwin port sale to Chinese-owned company Landbridge




ADF should build another jetty for its boats somewhere else


----------



## SirRumpole (15 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> ADF should build another jetty for its boats somewhere else




Or maybe some floating "lighthouses".


----------



## Tisme (15 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Or maybe some floating "lighthouses".




Build more subs and they can pen them in Clive's facilities in Port Hedland 

Would national security mean the ADF could turf the China citizens from sensitive operations and facilities when req'd?


----------



## noco (15 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Not being an accountant, but if Mal and Lucy decided not to take any income from those funds untill they retired to the Cayman Islands, they would essentially be getting their income from those funds tax free ?




Rumpy, do you have a link or some evidence of your statement or is that one of your thought bubbles?


----------



## SirRumpole (15 October 2015)

noco said:


> Rumpy, do you have a link or some evidence of your statement or is that one of your thought bubbles?




I admit to a thought bubble on that. 

I was simply posing a question and indicated my lack of qualifications beforehand.


----------



## noco (15 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I admit to a thought bubble on that.
> 
> I was simply posing a question and indicated my lack of qualifications beforehand.




Nice to see the honesty in you...Thanks.


----------



## MrBurns (15 October 2015)

I think they should get rid of Peter Dutton, he's annoying and looks very unlikely to have a clue.

On the ABC the other night he wouldn't shut up while being questioned to the point I wanted Emma to reach over and punch him in the face.

His face invites it -


----------



## SirRumpole (15 October 2015)

MrBurns said:


> I think they should get rid of Peter Dutton, he's annoying and looks very unlikely to have a clue.
> 
> On the ABC the other night he wouldn't shut up while being questioned to the point I wanted Emma to reach over and punch him in the face.
> 
> His face invites it -




I agree. I was very surprised that he and Brandis kept their positions.


----------



## qldfrog (15 October 2015)

Hey, he is my local member...
true..but yes, I believe he has no place in a government which tries to have a bit more clues than its predescessors


----------



## drsmith (15 October 2015)

Labor class warfare vs Malcolm Turnbull, a segment from QT today.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/video/id-IyamU3eDpQaFEXs9GyQnihm4Y0WVtPdS


----------



## noco (15 October 2015)

drsmith said:


> Labor class warfare vs Malcolm Turnbull, a segment from QT today.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/video/id-IyamU3eDpQaFEXs9GyQnihm4Y0WVtPdS




How much lower can the Labor go with their gutter sniping tactics?.......They are so desperate.

I would also say it a common Labor Party tactic to divert attention away from the allegations made against their fearless grinning  leader in the TURC.

During QT today, the hapless Labor stooges never asked one question about the economy, innovation, infrastructure or anything to do with policies of National interest....Just a lot of  tripe questions.

Desperate Labor comes up empty handed on tax havens

    The Australian
    October 15, 2015 12:00AM

    Print
    Save for later

124
Dennis Shanahan
Political Editor
Canberra
https://plus.google.com/103617325919509139218

*It was no surprise that Labor decided to go after Malcolm Turnbull’s wealth in concert with a campaign on corporate tax.

What was surprising was that it happened so early with so little effect.

The Prime Minister, famously a multi-millionaire with millions invested, was always going to face scrutiny over his investments, tax liabilities, corporate history and involvement with hundreds of companies when he took over the top job.

The Liberals knew it, Labor knew and Turnbull knew it.

That’s the point.

But that Labor was forced to resort to the silvertail attack, and an old one at that, to give the Labor base a bit of a warm inner envy suggests it has reached the bottom of the barrel very quickly.

Labor launched a series of nasty inferences yesterday about Turnbull’s investment involvement in the Cayman Islands, armed with quotes from Barack Obama about the “largest tax scam in the world”.

Financial services gadfly and NSW Labor right-wing attack dog Sam Dastyari started it in the Senate by saying Turnbull had investments in the Caymans where people “do not have to play by the same rules as the rest of us”.

While conceding it was all declared and legal, Dastyari asked if it was “appropriate”, and then his lower house colleagues pursued Turnbull in question time with the same material and suggestions he was helping to hide multinational company tax havens.

Fully prepared, forewarned and forearmed, Turnbull took the slurs head on after a bit of class warfare and politics-of-envy rhetoric, declaring that income from the investments is declared and taxed in full in Australia.

While there is no doubt Obama’s right to feel the US is losing out on potential income, Turnbull is solidly defending his own tax payments in Australia.

Apart from declaring he paid his tax, Turnbull went further to ask Labor to put up or shut up on his investments, offering to correct and declare any discrepancy it could bring to public attention.

So far, there has been no discrepancy. Given that the details of Turnbull’s Cayman Island investments have been public knowledge — and publicly explained — for more than a year, Labor’s attack fell flat.






http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...ty-on-tax-havens/story-e6frg75f-1227569409657*


----------



## qldfrog (15 October 2015)

And the ABC: yes the ABC  noted that the super fund our labor leader "managed" aka had his feed from is also invested there.


----------



## Tisme (16 October 2015)

Some of those questions from Shorten to Turnbull are obviously Dorothy Dixers ...... the LNP back bench might as well go home while the two in question play out their new found love affair, complete with the petty arguments and bank account details


----------



## MrBurns (16 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> Some of those questions from Shorten to Turnbull are obviously Dorothy Dixers ...... the LNP back bench might as well go home while the two in question play out their new found love affair, complete with the petty arguments and bank account details




Once again I have to say, question time is a disgrace and should be dispensed with so those bludgers can do some work.


----------



## Tisme (16 October 2015)

MrBurns said:


> Once again I have to say, question time is a disgrace and should be dispensed with so those bludgers can do some work.




And I say if they have to have it, at least give us a Paul Keating, Menzies or Churchill who can fly clever insults.


----------



## luutzu (16 October 2015)

MrBurns said:


> I think they should get rid of Peter Dutton, he's annoying and looks very unlikely to have a clue.
> 
> On the ABC the other night he wouldn't shut up while being questioned to the point I wanted Emma to reach over and punch him in the face.
> 
> His face invites it -




Why would you want people with power to have any clue? Can't control people like that.

He's the man who will be PM one day.


----------



## luutzu (16 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> And I say if they have to have it, at least give us a Paul Keating, Menzies or Churchill who can fly clever insults.




Yea, but clever insults need clever minds behind them. We'll have to put up with schoolyard insults for a while yet.


----------



## Knobby22 (19 October 2015)

Remember the show "Everyone loves Raymond"?

A new version is going to be produced, "Everybody likes Turnbull"

Great poll figures.


----------



## IFocus (19 October 2015)

Knobby22 said:


> Remember the show "Everyone loves Raymond"?
> 
> A new version is going to be produced, "Everybody likes Turnbull"
> 
> Great poll figures.




I think its relief Abbott's gone, Shorten was always hiding behind Abbott's daily disasters/war on everyone and everything.  

Turnbul still has a job in front of him dealing with the right wing mutts


----------



## Tisme (20 October 2015)

So the govt is now trying for a seat on the UN Human Rights Council ... that has to grate the campaigners for the welfare of asylum seekers and aboriginals. It almost seems impudent and obscene, but perhaps Julie can see a more humane LNP in the near future? 

This is the same people who berated and derided Rudd & Gillard for thinking we would have a chance getting a seat at the Security Council ...what's going on here .. has Bishop realised we don't have to be the petticoat of the majors or is she just enjoying being a somebody on the world stage, just like her nemesis Rudd has done for the last umpteen years?


----------



## SirRumpole (20 October 2015)

I wonder how far this will go

Senator Bill Heffernan uses parliamentary privilege to accuse former PM of being alleged paedophile

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-...former-pm-of-being-alleged-paedophile/6870532


----------



## Tisme (21 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I wonder how far this will go
> 
> Senator Bill Heffernan uses parliamentary privilege to accuse former PM of being alleged paedophile
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-...former-pm-of-being-alleged-paedophile/6870532




One of the worst kept secret yarns in the circles. Thailand and boys as I recall    ..... if it's the story I think it is.


----------



## noco (21 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I wonder how far this will go
> 
> Senator Bill Heffernan uses parliamentary privilege to accuse former PM of being alleged paedophile
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-...former-pm-of-being-alleged-paedophile/6870532




The quote comes out as though it is referring to Tony Abbot when it is stated the former PM...

Perhaps it should be clarified as "A" FORMER PM.

I really don't like the inference that has been made as some people may take it up the wrong way.


----------



## Logique (21 October 2015)

Don't know which former PM is being referred to, but suspect you'd have to go back to last century to unearth them.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> One of the worst kept secret yarns in the circles. Thailand and boys as I recall    ..... if it's the story I think it is.




I have never heard of this story as I'm not an insider. I have my suspicions because of something a current MP said on TV about a former PM.


----------



## MrBurns (21 October 2015)

Paul Keating was a former PM wasn't he ?


----------



## trainspotter (21 October 2015)

MrBurns said:


> Paul Keating was a former PM wasn't he ?








Rumours only rumours and hearsay .........


----------



## Tisme (21 October 2015)

trainspotter said:


> View attachment 64707
> 
> 
> Rumours only rumours and hearsay .........




Yes once you're an icon any made up story can stick.


----------



## Logique (21 October 2015)

Joe Hockey in a valedictory speech maintains that:

- the GST should be raised (tough luck, lower income earners and self-funded retirees, you'll be gouged)
- tax should be lowered (meaning what? The upper tax bracket on previous form, Joe doesn't need the money).

Don't let the gate hit your bum on the way out Joe.  If only you and Credlin had done the right thing at the right time.


----------



## Tisme (21 October 2015)

Facebook has latched onto the table:


----------



## SirRumpole (27 October 2015)

Best article I've seen on the super tax debate for a while

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-27/bagwell-super-tax-breaks-must-be-addressed/6887130


----------



## sptrawler (28 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Best article I've seen on the super tax debate for a while
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-27/bagwell-super-tax-breaks-must-be-addressed/6887130




Sounds good, just hope they have an hollistic approach and penalise those who spend everything, then get a pension.


----------



## Tisme (28 October 2015)

sptrawler said:


> .... just hope they have an hollistic approach and penalise those who spend everything, then get a pension.





Why?


----------



## MrBurns (28 October 2015)

sptrawler said:


> Sounds good, just hope they have an hollistic approach and penalise those who spend everything, then get a pension.




Take what you can get, everyone else does and half of them don't even speak English and/or walk out when the National Anthem is played...:frown:


----------



## SirRumpole (28 October 2015)

Someone seems to be worried about Nick

Prime Minister reveals NXT trepidation, warns Xenophon candidates 'won't be Nick clones'

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-28/prime-minister-reveals-fears-about-team-nxt/6891146


----------



## Tisme (28 October 2015)

Trent Zimmerman to replace Hockey eh?

That should make the old queens blow a fuse.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> Trent Zimmerman to replace Hockey eh?
> 
> That should make the old queens blow a fuse.




Who is Trent Zimmerman ?


----------



## Tisme (28 October 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Who is Trent Zimmerman ?




He's the bloke that gets parachuted in Joe Hockey's vacant seat, because the gutless Labor Party have decided it is a fait accompli, a lay down misere, a foregone conclusion, written in the stars, an unwinnable seat, etc .....makes me wonder how the battlers get to cast a vote for their voice to be heard.

Perhaps an independent with a national agenda (rather than someone who is driven by how his pinky bits compass behaves) might get up?


----------



## SirRumpole (28 October 2015)

Tisme said:


> He's the bloke that gets parachuted in Joe Hockey's vacant seat, because the gutless Labor Party have decided it is a fait accompli, a lay down misere, a foregone conclusion, written in the stars, an unwinnable seat, etc .....makes me wonder how the battlers get to cast a vote for their voice to be heard.
> 
> Perhaps an independent with a national agenda (rather than someone who is driven by how his pinky bits compass behaves) might get up?




Maybe Dick Smith should have a crack ?


----------



## SirRumpole (1 November 2015)

Is Turnbull's NBN a flop ?

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/turnbulls-faster-cheaper-nbn/6895762


----------



## ghotib (1 November 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Is Turnbull's NBN a flop ?
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/turnbulls-faster-cheaper-nbn/6895762




Oh yes. But that doesn't necessarily mean his whole government will be. We hope.


----------



## Tisme (2 November 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Is Turnbull's NBN a flop ?
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/turnbulls-faster-cheaper-nbn/6895762




Everyone in the business knew it was a political stunt and that we would end up with a Heath Robinson/McGyver network.

The thing I don't understand is why Telstra/Foxtel keeps getting special treatment by the Liberal Party..... who could possibly benefit from a system that wouldn't cope with the population wholesale switching to IPTV, Browsing, E Learning, etc ...... one would have to have a separate network to deliver 4k programs for instance ......

Giving Telstra the wholesale rights to the NBN is very similar to the wholesale monopoly they have on ADSL and for a long time the mobile market, which were both great success I guess.  

Remember this:

https://delimiter.com.au/2015/07/24...ulls-dept-for-backing-telstra-over-consumers/

and this:


https://delimiter.com.au/2013/10/21/turnbull-stacks-nbn-review-telstra-cronies/


and of course:

https://delimiter.com.au/2013/10/22/turnbull-wont-comment-nbn-jobs-boys/


----------



## Logique (3 November 2015)

The Turnbull government will not be getting my vote if they proceed with this regressive 15% GST proposal.

Marginal Coalition seats will swing on this - once low incomers, self-funded retirees and single mothers twig that they're being shafted, by a conspiratorial alliance of the political class and chattering elites.

The (50% extra) GST will be spent, in part, on tax cuts at the upper end of the scale, i.e. what is really being proposed is a re-distribution of wealth towards the middle class. 

Slipping +67 yrs pensioners a few extra bucks a week isn't genuine compensation, it's just for show.

My local electorate has become increasingly marginal, I reckon this would tip it over the line to Labor.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 November 2015)

I agree Logique although I don't think my seat is at threat as the Nationals have it locked up.

Paul Keating said that he won in 93 over Hewson because he said that if the Liberals won he would let the GST through, ie the only way to avoid a GST was to elect a Labor government.

Bill Shorten has the chance to do the same, but he has to put up a credible alternative to solve the deficit problem, another MRRT perhaps ?


----------



## Logique (3 November 2015)

I was thinking of Paul Keating in the context of leadership, it was brutal how he attacked John Hewson during that election campaign. Shorten is no Keating, which is hardly a news flash. 

On Q & A last night, Tony Perk ...er Burke, said Labor would look at making multinational companies pay a fairer share, and also at tightening super tax concessions at the upper end.  Another option that he didn't mention is potentially raising the Medicare Levy. Or as you say, re-visitation of a resources rent tax.  

All of these options are more palatable than the Coalition's mealy-mouthed self interest on this issue. Who's playing class wars now, Malcolm T. and Scott M.


----------



## sptrawler (3 November 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I agree Logique although I don't think my seat is at threat as the Nationals have it locked up.
> 
> Paul Keating said that he won in 93 over Hewson because he said that if the Liberals won he would let the GST through, ie the only way to avoid a GST was to elect a Labor government.




Yet Keating was the first treasurer to push for it.



SirRumpole said:


> Bill Shorten has the chance to do the same, but he has to put up a credible alternative to solve the deficit problem, another MRRT perhaps ?




Bill won't put up anything, he hasn't a clue, absolute joke.


----------



## orr (4 November 2015)

Turnbull, parading a new chief Scientist with a view to the possibilities of an expanded role in the nuclear fuel cycle and a Labor State premier, eight odd months into a Royal Commission into the same field of inquiry; 
A Thirty-Billion dollar industry in taking back what we already export, value adding and then shipping it out again banging on the door and saying... _'let us in'_ in a state reeling from the economic shocks to the mining, car manufacture, the non-carbon tax induced Whyalla wipeout, where confidence is plummeting and unemployment marching north. 'The 'on the horizon' possibilities of forth generation fast breeder technology, now that we seem to have enough war heads pointing at each other and can afford to do something useful with the 99% of fissile energy not use in the majority of current functioning reactors...
What's the word on the street down in the driest state on the driest continent on earth?... A start on this would get me to move there. That and the lamb finished on salt bush, and the king george whiting.  

a few notes on Nuclear Fast reactors;

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Current-and-Future-Generation/Fast-Neutron-Reactors/


----------



## Tisme (5 November 2015)

Fingers crossed we have the leadership to create industry:

http://www.afr.com/leadership/innov...ed-says-csiros-larry-marshall-20151101-gknyfs


----------



## noco (10 November 2015)

Turnbull now has the coalition leading the useless Labor Party 53% to 47% in the latest opinion poll.

I guess he must be doing something right to get voters on board with what he is trying to achieve.

So instead of the LUG Party saying NO..NO..NO..to everything, perhaps they might start to think of changing their attitude to get people back on side.

I say have a DD in March and root out the dead wood holding Australia back...The Lug Party are still living in the 20th century..

https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/30043135/voters-like-the-turnbull-vision/

*One of Tony Abbott's strongest backers believes Australians are responding positively to Malcolm Turnbull's style of leadership.

"They see in Malcolm Turnbull a person who has a vision for this country and I think that's why people are supporting him," Peter Dutton told Sky News on Tuesday.

The latest Newspoll has Mr Turnbull holding a commanding 61-18 per cent lead over Bill Shorten as preferred prime minister.

Treasurer Scott Morrison said the poll, showing the coalition increasing its two-party preferred lead over Labor to 53-47 per cent, was an indication of the electorate's sophistication about the tax reform debate.

"We understand that they're quite capable of allowing Australians to discuss these issues and know that just because something is being discussed doesn't mean it's going to be introduced," he told ABC radio.*


----------



## Logique (22 November 2015)

Turnbull and Obama are two peas in a pod if you ask me.

"..every problem has an easy solution, and they are all found by watching the ABC" - irony from Steve Kates 



> Learning on the job – international division
> 
> Catallaxy Files: http://catallaxyfiles.com/2015/11/21/learning-on-the-job-international-division/
> Posted November 21, 2015 by Steve Kates
> ...


----------



## dutchie (22 November 2015)

Turnbell may have economic credentials.







But he is still on training wheels with international politics.


----------



## dutchie (1 December 2015)

Malcolm is right. ISIS is weak.

So weak that we may have to cancel/scale down the Gallipoli commemorations in Turkey because of them.


----------



## dutchie (3 December 2015)

Looks like Turnbull needs to take another train trip to show up his ministers.

My $30,000 flight was within guidelines: Julie Bishop

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...nes-julie-bishop/story-fn59niix-1227630956673


----------



## MrBurns (3 December 2015)

Julie Bishop is looking bad lately, her "recollection" of a conversation warning Abbott of the challenge was different than his etc all with that huge false grin.
Damn liars the lot of them but still better than Billy Liars lot.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 December 2015)

MrBurns said:


> Julie Bishop is looking bad lately, her "recollection" of a conversation warning Abbott of the challenge was different than his etc all with that huge false grin.
> Damn liars the lot of them but still better than Billy Liars lot.




I doubt if anyone except the Opposition and the media give a stuff about who said what to whom in the Lib leadership debacle, it's a matter of internal party organisation, as were Labor's challenges.

There are too many journalists who have to write something otherwise they don't get paid, and writing about politics is a lot easier than doing some hard work and analysing policies.

It is the 24 hour news cycle that keeps fuelling this trivia.


----------



## Tisme (3 December 2015)

MrBurns said:


> :
> Damn liars the lot of them but still better than Billy Liars lot.




I don't why you would choose to weight lying by introducing your personal bias. A lie is a lie.

One difference between Labor and Liberal party attitudes (as opposed to ideologies)  is that while the Libs are happy to pursue Labor members through the courts like a Jew after a bone, Labor is traditionally a wilting flower, with some misplaced belief in sympathy for the human stain and political brotherhood.

For Labor to be chasing one time PM hopeful,  Mal Brough over his subversion of parliament and bare faced lies, there must be a strong belief that justice through the courts must be served. He's a leper in his own tribe of peers. Where are the proponents of truth in this when applying the same delight of denunciation that would occur if it was a Labor minister in a Labor govt?


----------



## MrBurns (3 December 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I doubt if anyone except the Opposition and the media give a stuff about who said what to whom in the Lib leadership debacle, it's a matter of internal party organisation, as were Labor's challenges.
> 
> There are too many journalists who have to write something otherwise they don't get paid, and writing about politics is a lot easier than doing some hard work and analysing policies.
> 
> It is the 24 hour news cycle that keeps fuelling this trivia.




I agree entirely, it's old news and all sorts of stuff goes on in a leadership challenge that no one cares about but she looked very bad denying the obvious,  Abbott should just shut his mouth and have some dignity.


----------



## Knobby22 (3 December 2015)

MrBurns said:


> I agree entirely, it's old news and all sorts of stuff goes on in a leadership challenge that no one cares about but she looked very bad denying the obvious,  Abbott should just shut his mouth and have some dignity.




Abbott is back at what he is does best, leader of the opposition.


----------



## MrBurns (3 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> I don't why you would choose to weight lying by introducing your personal bias. A lie is a lie.




The difference is the ALP run the country badly with no idea how to spend money as evidenced by recent events.
The NLP on the other hand know how things work especially with Turnbull at the helm there for I prefer liars that do good over liars that are incompetent.


----------



## Tisme (3 December 2015)

MrBurns said:


> The difference is the ALP run the country badly with no idea how to spend money as evidenced by recent events.
> The NLP on the other hand know how things work especially with Turnbull at the helm there for I prefer liars that do good over liars that are incompetent.




Fair enough.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> Fair enough.




It would be if this government actually did something good


----------



## Tisme (3 December 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> It would be if this government actually did something good




I think you have set the bar too high. The current and last PM are both journalists and if Andrew Bolt is the yardstick ........

I can't vouch for its authenticity, but I'm pretty sure this emulates the initiation rites into the majors these days:


----------



## SirRumpole (3 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> I think you have set the bar too high. The current and last PM are both journalists and if Andrew Bolt is the yardstick ........
> 
> I can't vouch for its authenticity, but I'm pretty sure this emulates the initiation rites into the majors these days:





Ha ha.

Flashes of a gumby about to do brain surgery flashed before me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M68GeL8PafE


----------



## noco (3 December 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I doubt if anyone except the Opposition and the media give a stuff about who said what to whom in the Lib leadership debacle, it's a matter of internal party organisation, as were Labor's challenges.
> 
> There are too many journalists who have to write something otherwise they don't get paid, and writing about politics is a lot easier than doing some hard work and analysing policies.
> 
> It is the 24 hour news cycle that keeps fuelling this trivia.




I have to agree with you Rumpy.......It is called the digital express.


----------



## Logique (6 December 2015)

Swing against the Libs in the North Sydney by-election 13%.

First preference 47%, even though no Labor candidate stood.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 December 2015)

Logique said:


> Swing against the Libs in the North Sydney by-election 13%.
> 
> First preference 47%, even though no Labor candidate stood.




Very interesting...


----------



## drsmith (6 December 2015)

Malcolm has had a (B)rough week.


----------



## trainspotter (6 December 2015)

drsmith said:


> Malcolm has had a (B)rough week.




Touche' on the media inuendo


----------



## Tisme (7 December 2015)

Brough might be the current target, but his co conspirators, Wyatt Roy and Chris Pyne would also be in the soup if the  AFP find the smoking gun.


----------



## dutchie (8 December 2015)

Malcolm sounding like Joh more and more.


----------



## Tisme (9 December 2015)

There appears to be a malaise among many Liberal Party supporters that Malcolm isn't a true Liberal.

I'm wondering what it takes to meet the minimum requirements? Anyone?


----------



## SirRumpole (9 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> There appears to be a malaise among many Liberal Party supporters that Malcolm isn't a true Liberal.
> 
> I'm wondering what it takes to meet the minimum requirements? Anyone?




Beats me too. Maybe continuing the class war against unions would be a sign of a "true" Liberal. 

Reminds me of the rumours that Martin Ferguson is not a "true Laborite" because he stood against the mining tax.

Rats in all the ranks I suppose.


----------



## Logique (10 December 2015)

Bronwyn is just wanting to protect us from terrorism.



> Bronwyn Bishop says she will recontest her seat of Mackellar, telling Liberal Party supporters on Sydney's northern beaches that the "threat of terrorism" had convinced her she needs to remain in Parliament...
> 
> ...But Mrs Bishop's disloyalty went further, Fairfax Media can reveal.
> In the days after Mr Abbott's downfall, she lobbied senior Liberals, including Christopher Pyne, to be appointed a minister in Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull post-spill reshuffle...
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (10 December 2015)

Logique said:


> Bronwyn is just wanting to protect us from terrorism.




And the fact that if she retires as a Minister her super goes up...


----------



## SirRumpole (10 December 2015)

Has Turnbull stuffed the NBN ?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-10/manning-the-turnbull-ascendancy-part-iv/7008318


----------



## Tisme (11 December 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Has Turnbull stuffed the NBN ?
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-10/manning-the-turnbull-ascendancy-part-iv/7008318




We all knew it was one of a suite of divisive fear items Abbott and his crew used to get elected. For the <0.01% of the population who actually know anything about networks it has been a grand display of electoral stupidity and deliberate lies. Why Bill Shorten has played mum escapes me.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> Why Bill Shorten has played mum escapes me.




I think the subject is so complex that Bill is worried about being caught out. 

If supposedly tech savvy Turnbull is out of his depth then Bill has little hope.

It's about time the politicians get out of the project and it gets turned over to Infrastructure Australia to decide the best way forward.


----------



## Tisme (11 December 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> *I think the subject is so complex that Bill is worried about being caught out. *
> 
> If supposedly tech savvy Turnbull is out of his depth then Bill has little hope.
> 
> It's about time the politicians get out of the project and it gets turned over to Infrastructure Australia to decide the best way forward.





For a man of the people, he should be playing that card and telling the great unwashed that although it's white magic he is not stupid enough to see the costs blowing out way past the $23bn Labor spend on a $46bn project, all the resellers are agog at how primitive it is, the rest of the world are making a laughing stock out of us, etc.

For the LNP to be now be selling the idea of technical training to school children when they vehemently opposed the same of the previous govts is another hook he should be playing off. I get angry when I think back at how the might of the education dept dinosaurs came down on one of my own because she was teaching uni level programming and robotics to junior school students.... poor kids who had no future, but have taken up the challenge, gone to uni, now in very good jobs and regularly ringing mine to thank her for giving guidance, relevance, hope and a ****.

I had my kids on the net in 1992, they had a networked computer each and my boy was doing CAD designs at 11 years old.... where was Malcolm then except jagging a fortune on a Dot.com gamble that paid out during the tech stock bubble.

We need an old skool Labor leader who can be proud of a boiler maker trade, work in hard with the good bits that Malcolm comes up with and get some interest of politics back into the millenium generation, rather than making the Greens look like a viable alternative to those who can't stomach the LNP. 

Remember a vote for Tisme is a vote for a more relaxed 1950's lifestyle = 5 ½ day working week, two long necks max on a Sunday, leaded petrol, mandatory 4 week xmas break sharing a canvas tent and dunnikins, hours and hours of lying in the breezeway of the house while temps soared outside, open wood fires that suffocated everyone to sleep by 8.30pm, chopping wet kindling with frozen fingers .....  dead by age 67 ah for the good old daze.


----------



## luutzu (11 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> For a man of the people, he should be playing that card and telling the great unwashed that although it's white magic he is not stupid enough to see the costs blowing out way past the $23bn Labor spend on a $46bn project, all the resellers are agog at how primitive it is, the rest of the world are making a laughing stock out of us, etc.
> 
> For the LNP to be now be selling the idea of technical training to school children when they vehemently opposed the same of the previous govts is another hook he should be playing off. I get angry when I think back at how the might of the education dept dinosaurs came down on one of my own because she was teaching uni level programming and robotics to junior school students.... poor kids who had no future, but have taken up the challenge, gone to uni, now in very good jobs and regularly ringing mine to thank her for giving guidance, relevance, hope and a ****.
> 
> ...




Yea, your doo-good daughter should stick to what our year 10 computing teacher did and let a mac programme teach us how to type all term. Final grade was how fast you could type    Though to be fair, he was a music teacher and only sit in on computing until a younger more qualified computing teacher came along a couple years later.


----------



## drsmith (14 December 2015)

Ian Macfarlane blocked from moving to Nationals by LNP executive,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-14/ian-macfarlane-blocked-from-moving-to-nationals/7026920

Now that's fallen on its face I suspect he will early next year decide to quit politics.


----------



## Tisme (14 December 2015)

drsmith said:


> Ian Macfarlane blocked from moving to Nationals by LNP executive,
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-14/ian-macfarlane-blocked-from-moving-to-nationals/7026920
> 
> Now that's fallen on its face I suspect he will early next year decide to quit politics.




If he's Ian I once knew, he will do what he thinks is right for the primary producers.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 December 2015)

I think we can see why the memberships are deserting political parties, vote 102-34 for a proposal and have it knocked back by the executive.

Why would you bother being a party member ?


----------



## drsmith (14 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> If he's Ian I once knew, he will do what he thinks is right for the primary producers.



You knew him personally ?

If so, in what sense ?


----------



## SirRumpole (14 December 2015)

drsmith said:


> You knew him personally ?
> 
> If so, in what sense ?




Please don't say the Biblical sense.


----------



## Tisme (15 December 2015)

drsmith said:


> You knew him personally ?
> 
> If so, in what sense ?




Well that would be telling Zachary, but we have been known to chat on the odd occasion, but not for a few years now.  He's a good bloke I think and has demonstrated a passion for the cockies.


----------



## Tisme (15 December 2015)

So I'm wondering how the economic managers have managed us into a projected $600bn debt? 

I thought we were going to balance the books by giving the tradies $20k tax incentives, undeserved pay rises to the sitting members and helicopter trips to weddings? 

There must be something missing in the formula; instead of Pavlova we getting more and more Banana.


----------



## moXJO (15 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> For the LNP to be now be selling the idea of technical training to school children when they vehemently opposed the same of the previous govts is another hook he should be playing off. I get angry when I think back at how the might of the education dept dinosaurs came down on one of my own because she was teaching uni level programming and robotics to junior school students.... poor kids who had no future, but have taken up the challenge, gone to uni, now in very good jobs and regularly ringing mine to thank her for giving guidance, relevance, hope and a ****.




Education in this country is a joke. Good on your daughter for providing the students with something 90% of teachers fail with.... Usable knowledge.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (15 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> So I'm wondering how the economic managers have managed us into a projected $600bn debt?
> 
> I thought we were going to balance the books by giving the tradies $20k tax incentives, undeserved pay rises to the sitting members and helicopter trips to weddings?
> 
> There must be something missing in the formula; instead of Pavlova we getting more and more Banana.




Savings are to be made by cutting down on welfare fraud, apparently.

That means they are aware of welfare fraud but have chosen to do nothing?  How else could you interpret it?


----------



## trainspotter (15 December 2015)

I know how to fix the economy ... handout $900 x 3 to 8 million people 



> Why has the government lowered the bonus by $50?
> When Kevin Rudd first announced the *$42 billion stimulus* plan in February, he outlined plans for cash handouts of up to $950.
> 
> In recent weeks that has been reduced to a maximum of $900. The government has said the cut was made in order to *strike a balance between being responsible and acting fast.*




http://finance.ninemsn.com.au/pfmanagingmoney/spending/8125566/900-cash-bonus-who-gets-it

No wait ... we can introduce a mining tax to balance the books a'la Swanny style that will surely help 



> The government had predicted in last year's budget that the MRRT would bring in $3 billion in its first year of operation - a figure later downgraded to $2 billion. In the end, *the tax raised just $126 million* in its first six months of operation.May 10, 2013




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ast-slumps-again/story-fn59niix-1226635816402

No wait ... send the toecutters in Mr Morrison 



> There’s a $105.1m saving from including parental leave pay and dad and partner pay payments in the definition of income for Commonwealth income support payments.
> An outlay of $29.5m to expand debt recovery in human services – which books a $157.8m saving.
> A $1.3bn saving from “recovering money for a greater number of people where discrepancies have been identified between employment income declared to Centrelink and PAYG information provided to the ATO.”
> An additional $694.8m from data matching.
> ...




http://www.theguardian.com/australi...leases-mid-year-economic-update-politics-live

No wait let's ... have a carbon tax 

No wait ... let's repeal the carbon tax to win votes 

NONE OF THEM HAVE A FREAKIN CLUE !!!!

(Except Tisme as the hot air will run the generators for months  )


----------



## Tisme (15 December 2015)

trainspotter said:


> NONE OF THEM HAVE A FREAKIN CLUE !!!!
> 
> (Except Tisme as the hot air will run the generators for months  )




Develop an itch that had to be scratched Mr Potter?


----------



## Logique (15 December 2015)

Tomorrow the Turnbull government will announce their 'tough' budget.

Let's see who it will be toughest on. 

I'm tipping that people with harbourside mansions, say for example at Point Piper, won't need to be too concerned.


----------



## trainspotter (15 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> Develop an itch that had to be scratched Mr Potter?




You got my vote ....



> Remember a vote for Tisme is a vote for a more relaxed 1950's lifestyle = 5 ½ day working week, two long necks max on a Sunday, leaded petrol, mandatory 4 week xmas break sharing a canvas tent and dunnikins, hours and hours of lying in the breezeway of the house while temps soared outside, open wood fires that suffocated everyone to sleep by 8.30pm, chopping wet kindling with frozen fingers ..... dead by age 67 ah for the good old daze.


----------



## Tisme (15 December 2015)

Logique said:


> Tomorrow the Turnbull government will announce their 'tough' budget.
> 
> Let's see who it will be toughest on.
> 
> I'm tipping that people with harbourside mansions, say for example at Point Piper, won't need to be too concerned.




Scott explained it tonight on the biased ABC.


----------



## sptrawler (15 December 2015)

trainspotter said:


> I know how to fix the economy ... handout $900 x 3 to 8 million people
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Funny, I was just going to post the same thing.

All the Laborites were saying, it wasn't the mining boom that saved us from the GFC, it was $900 cheques to all and sundry.

Well, will another $900 cheque, save us now.lol

There are country towns in W.A that are probably going to disappear in the next few years, if the commodity price doesn't recover.

It just highlights how stupid and useless Labor were, Super profits tax on no profit lol, throw away money to buy plasma t.v's now on the tip, absolute bimbos.IMO

The infrastructure that could have been initiated for long term growth, rather than cheap vote grabbing cheques, would be paying off now.

But it wouldn't be headline grabbing for Kev, sad state of affairs, everyone will be hurt.


----------



## Tisme (15 December 2015)

I'm still narky I didn't qualify for the plasma TV  handout


----------



## SirRumpole (15 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> I'm still narky I didn't qualify for the plasma TV  handout




As with the $900 , when they handed out brains I thought they said trains and missed mine.


----------



## Tisme (16 December 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> As with the $900 , when they handed out brains I thought they said trains and missed mine.




I must admit I don't know anyone who got a plasma/$900 ... they are either liars or the story is bogus I reckon.

On topic, it is becoming rather clear than Tony fell on his sword for Hockey once the rest of his mob twigged they are not any good at economic management and that the $600bn they used as a bogeyman to whip up hate for the Labor Party was actually coming true under their direction.

I'm guessing stalling the economy back to the "Fidelity Fiduciary Bank" model of the pre 70's wasn't a good move afterall.


----------



## noco (16 December 2015)

Those "Dudd" $900 cheques  was only a loan.......We now find ourselves having to pay it back in cuts to welfare and other services and everybody is screaming....They were.well and truly conned by Rudd..

"Free" roof insulation.....Nah.....nothing is free......you are now having to pay for that as well.....Another dudd Rudd idea......even the ones who didn't get it are having to pay for the ones who did get it as well.


----------



## Tisme (16 December 2015)

noco said:


> ......even the ones who didn't get it are having to pay for the ones who did get it as well.




Yeah well I don't seem to have ever qualified for any assistance, rebates etc, but I know I have a civic responsibility to see tax go to the less fortunate and needy ...e.g. the 50,000 Tarago vanned kiwis who arrive every year, the 20,000 merc and audi driving middle class refugees from the middle east, the aid to the islands nation above us who hate our guts, etc.

What I don't understand is why we continue to pour money into old age health and indigenous programs. Has no one taken heed of the mockumentary from 1975 "Death Race 2000", especially the Mercy Hospital scene? Some say it was a parody of Liberal govt versus Labor and the working classes, but I don't subscribe to that ....much 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8p05-ZAYhs8


----------



## MrBurns (16 December 2015)

This is only going to get worse, I don't have the answer, simply raising taxes indefinitely will hit the wall eventually  - 



> •Nation’s welfare system on track to cost $190 billion annually
> •Growth of welfare meant new IT system had to be implemented
> •Eight out of 10 income taxpayers are now paying nation’s welfare bill
> •Govt says savings vital to continue providing for those in genuine need





http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...-payments-a-year/story-fni0cx12-1227419226438


----------



## Ves (16 December 2015)

noco said:


> Those "Dudd" $900 cheques  was only a loan.......We now find ourselves having to pay it back in cuts to welfare and other services and everybody is screaming....They were.well and truly conned by Rudd..
> 
> "Free" roof insulation.....Nah.....nothing is free......you are now having to pay for that as well.....Another dudd Rudd idea......even the ones who didn't get it are having to pay for the ones who did get it as well.



You guys keep going on and on and on about these "Dudd" cheques and have continually misstated the actual cost to the taxpayer.

For a bit of perspective - the Iraq / Afganistan "wars on terror" which have now been described as abject failures by a lot of the decision makers involved cost Australia more than Rudd's cheques. In fact,  most security experts said they have caused more terrorism,  not stopped it.

Some more perspective - the "Dudd" cheques cost about 2.6% of the budget receipts and were the _equivalent_ to only a quarter of the current budget deficit.

Even more perspective - Morrison / Hockey's budget spending of 26.2% of GDP  (people who claimed they would "stop the waste") is higher than anything under Labor (and Howard I'm fairly sure).

Yet,  taxation receipts compared to GDP is also higher.

Simply put,   this government is taxing more and spending more.

Assuming the government gets three full election terms,   the debt inherited from Labor will have tripled   (which is odd,  considering in opposition they kept telling us it'd be gone).

Which is completely at odds with the claims of "budget crisis"  and "low taxing, small government."


----------



## Tisme (16 December 2015)

MrBurns said:


> This is only going to get worse, I don't have the answer, simply raising taxes indefinitely will hit the wall eventually  -
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Paul Keating saw it coming and wanted to insulate us through superannuation via the then infamous tripartite agreement between evil trade unionists, a commo govt and state enslaved employers. Howard knew better and made sure the weight around our neck would be minimised by capping it to 9%, thus relieving us the burden of another $500bn forced saving into nation building projects and subsequent net tax take for govt the original 12% would have caused.


----------



## luutzu (16 December 2015)

MrBurns said:


> This is only going to get worse, I don't have the answer, simply raising taxes indefinitely will hit the wall eventually  -
> 
> 
> http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...-payments-a-year/story-fni0cx12-1227419226438




I thought it's the job of gov't to take care of the sick, the elderly, the poor, the broke... What else were they expecting to use the money on? Tax cuts to the millionaires and corporations? More jets and bombers? More lifetime pensions for politicians?


----------



## MrBurns (16 December 2015)

luutzu said:


> I thought it's the job of gov't to take care of the sick, the elderly, the poor, the broke... What else were they expecting to use the money on? Tax cuts to the millionaires and corporations? More jets and bombers? More lifetime pensions for politicians?




How many on welfare are genuine ?
I think we would all get a shock if we knew.


----------



## luutzu (16 December 2015)

MrBurns said:


> How many on welfare are genuine ?
> I think we would all get a shock if we knew.




Could be a good surprise if we knew. Maybe the figures aren't that bad. And those that are found to cheat the system will have to repay it, with interests and fine I think. 

Anyway, it's class warfare and the plebs aren't winning.

Pretty strange all these blame game when you think about it...

Say Joe is the big man,  Joe is the gov't... and because Joe  suck at his job and made policies that drove millions of people to the welfare office - Joe probably shouldn't start complaining about all new poor broke people now needing some handouts. Should joe?

But of course Joe does and go on media blaming the bad shape we're all in on the poor and the disabled. 

Yes, we can't afford this many poor people... so let's cut the handouts and that'll motivate them to find work. Some smarter mind might suggest that instead of cutting, borrow or print more money to invest in infrastructure and jobs and education.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 December 2015)

MrBurns said:


> How many on welfare are genuine ?
> I think we would all get a shock if we knew.




Your statement implies that you do know.

There should be some statistical method of determining how many are double dipping (claiming multiple benefits), but all means of reducing welfare cheating seem to have been rejected since Hawke wanted to bring in identity cards (remember the Australia card ?), and the Medicare card seems to be the alternative to this.

Trouble is when you talk of measures like finger printing welfare recipients the civil liberties people raise a stink about Nazism or some rubbish so it's really up to us to decide whether we want anonymity or welfare fraud.


----------



## boofhead (16 December 2015)

Some care needs to be taken in how you view the welfare spending. It includes the aged pension (and we should be aware of how a former government made it easier for more people to access it) and not only look at those on disability or newstart payments. A large chunk is going to the aged.

Some consideration for the age care cost is that nursing home residents are often recipients of it. Will one government try to be trickey and moved more funding of nursing homes on to health to make welfare section of the budget look better?

http://budget.gov.au/2014-15/content/bp1/html/bp1_bst6-01.htm has some interesting info.

Ultimately health and aged are a significant cost. Time for the government to put money in to R&D for such sectors and taking on some cost of production of any success from the R&D


----------



## trainspotter (16 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> I must admit I don't know anyone who got a plasma/$900 ... they are either liars or the story is bogus I reckon.
> 
> On topic, it is becoming rather clear than Tony fell on his sword for Hockey once the rest of his mob twigged they are not any good at economic management and that the $600bn they used as a bogeyman to whip up hate for the Labor Party was actually coming true under their direction.
> 
> I'm guessing stalling the economy back to the "Fidelity Fiduciary Bank" model of the pre 70's wasn't a good move afterall.






> The move follows last week's cheekier proposition from retailer Kogan Technologies - which began offering a 37-inch *high definition TV for $900 *- billed as a "bargain" price.






> Who is eligible?
> The bonus will be available to *Australian resident taxpayers who paid net tax in the 2007-08 financial year*.
> 
> How do I claim it?
> ...




So either you did not lodge your tax return by June 30th 2009 or you earned more than 100k 

http://finance.ninemsn.com.au/pfmanagingmoney/spending/8125566/900-cash-bonus-who-gets-it

On topic Tony never fell on his sword ... he was stabbed in the back by Turnbull & Bishop in a "Et tu Brute" coup de grÃ¢ce fashion to salvage the trainwreck of the Liberal Party bumblings about Homeland Security and running a "lookback" scare campaign that was failing as Labor and Shorten had them on the ropes.


----------



## Tisme (16 December 2015)

trainspotter said:


> So either you did not lodge your tax return by June 30th 2009 or you earned more than 100k




Who didn't?  You mean there are actually people out there who don't pay more than that in tax? How do all these people afford Sydney house prices?!!


----------



## trainspotter (16 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> Who didn't?  You mean there are actually people out there who don't pay more than that in tax? How do all these people afford Sydney house prices?!!




You should really have a talk to your accountant about that because you are paying far too much in tax 

*Breaking news* ... Wait for Morris to introduce a "Deficit Levy" on high income earners. 

To be disguised as a "Temporary Budget Repair Levy"


----------



## Tisme (16 December 2015)

trainspotter said:


> You should really have a talk to your accountant about that because you are paying far too much in tax
> 
> *Breaking news* ... Wait for Morris to introduce a "Deficit Levy" on high income earners.
> 
> To be disguised as a "Temporary Budget Repair Levy"




When you've been audited over by the tax dept once ....

The Libs are not good at hurting big business are they.


----------



## trainspotter (16 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> When you've been audited over by the tax dept once ....
> 
> The Libs are not good at hurting big business are they.




Being audited by the ATO once is not ground breaking in itself but to do it in such a way that even they don't understand is a tremendous achievement.

The Libs have nowhere to go. Toecutting and snipping will not save the budget or Australia. Taxing the rich and the bigger companies is the last and only viable option hence my earlier post in regards to MRRT and Carbon Tax and Stimulus packages. Nowhere to hide and nowhere to run. Time to pay the piper


----------



## Logique (16 December 2015)

Indeed TS, but do they have the stomach for it.

Meanwhile this little rort looks like continuing, as the Turnbull government rhetoric collapses at the first sign of opposition.



> *Turnbull government to compromise on paid parental leave 'double dipping'* - December 16, 2015
> SMH: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...le-dipping-20151216-glopny.html#ixzz3uSu6MTUH
> 
> The Turnbull government has confirmed it is backing away from unpopular changes to paid parental leave proposed under Tony Abbott that saw new parents who claimed work and government entitlements accused of being "double dippers".
> ...


----------



## drsmith (16 December 2015)

The detail of the changes from the above article,



> If they have an employer scheme that covered them at their full wage for less than 18 weeks, they would be able to claim government payments at the minimum wage for the remainder of that period.






> The work test currently requires women to have worked 330 hours in 10 of the 13-months before the birth or adoption of their child, with a maximum break of eight weeks between work days during those 13 months.
> 
> For births from July 1, 2016, eligible parents will be able to have a 12-week break between work days in the 13 months before the birth or adoption of their child, and still meet the work test, a move the government says will be fairer for workers such as casual teachers.


----------



## Logique (18 December 2015)

In principal, nothing wrong with having a supportive partner along at such high level meetings, but all the same, a quiet word in Ms Bishop's ear from PM Turnbull mightn't be amiss here. 
Hope I don't get suspended as a poster



Airport worker suspended for screening Julie Bishop in breach of 'random check' rules - December 17, 2015
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...heck-rules-20151217-glpqcj.html#ixzz3ubiAaAVm 


> SMH: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...heck-rules-20151217-glpqcj.html#ixzz3ubi3nmDq
> 
> ...Ms Bishop was joined on her New York trip by her Melbourne-based partner David Panton.
> 
> Days later, Ms Bishop fended off claims by Labor that she was not taking her job as the nation's chief diplomat seriously after *Mr Panton was photographed sitting next to her on the floor of the UN General Assembly.*.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 December 2015)

What would have been hot politics if Parliament was sitting turned into cold news during the holidays.


Jamie Briggs quits over late-night bar scandal in Hong Kong, Mal Brough stands aside over Slipper affair



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-29/mal-brough-and-jamie-briggs-stand-down-from-frontbench/7058266


----------



## Tom32 (29 December 2015)

Wow Jamie Briggs scandal doesn't sound real scandalous compared to most work trips I've had to Hong Kong and found myself in wan chai in the evening.

she sounds like she needs to harden up. That said he is only selling his side of the story at this stage. 

A more important question for me is how many public servants get to go on these junkets?


----------



## Logique (30 December 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> What would have been hot politics if Parliament was sitting turned into cold news during the holidays.
> Jamie Briggs quits over late-night bar scandal in Hong Kong, Mal Brough stands aside over Slipper affair
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-29/mal-brough-and-jamie-briggs-stand-down-from-frontbench/7058266



Sounds like Briggs had it coming, like it was the last straw. http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...who-overstepped-the-mark-20151229-glwgt3.html

All the same, that Canberra bureaucrat hasn't done herself any favours.  You go out for late night drinks with Briggs, then moan about him afterwards, behind his back?  Not too many invitations coming her way in the future.


----------



## Tisme (30 December 2015)

Logique said:


> Sounds like Briggs had it coming, like it was the last straw. http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...who-overstepped-the-mark-20151229-glwgt3.html
> 
> All the same, that Canberra bureaucrat hasn't done herself any favours.  You go out for late night drinks with Briggs, then moan about him afterwards, behind his back?  Not too many invitations coming her way in the future.




Yeah, women commit professional hari kari when the go down the men behaving badly complaint path. And oddly enough it's the female colleagues who treat them as a leper from then on. 

Funny how equal opportunity always equates to steering clear of offending females no matter how trivial the assault on the senses. I often wonder if the conversion to Islam is in part fueled by men and women who can't accept the veneer of conformal politeness forced on them by the authorities, preferring the law of the jungle instead.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 December 2015)

Tisme said:


> Yeah, women commit professional hari kari when the go down the men behaving badly complaint path. And oddly enough it's the female colleagues who treat them as a leper from then on.




Are you saying that some women public servants trade favours for promotion ?

It happens in business so I don't see why public servants should be immune.


----------



## Tisme (30 December 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Are you saying that some women public servants trade favours for promotion ?
> 
> It happens in business so I don't see why public servants should be immune.




I'm saying no one likes a snitch and using the gender card makes it worse.


----------



## basilio (30 December 2015)

We don't know what went down with Jamie Biggs in the Hong Kong bar. Clearly he decided that if it did all come out in the wash he was not going to look good. 

I gather from other media reports that he was regarded as a loose cannon amongst the Liberals and that his behaviour was part of  a pattern.  (in fact there may well be a few other female public servants with a story to tell who have bitten their lips to date. Maybe..)

The really interesting part however is the opportunity for Tony Abbott to be welcomed back onto the front bench. Eric Abetz thinks this would be a great idea...

Simple way to check this thought bubble out out. Lets see if the next opinion polls can pose the question of whether Tony Abbott should come back as a Minister.  Would be a fascinating query.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 December 2015)

basilio said:


> Simple way to check this thought bubble out out. Lets see if the next opinion polls can pose the question of whether Tony Abbott should come back as a Minister.  Would be a fascinating query.




Make him Workplace Relations Minister and see if he can get the TRUC recommendations through.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 January 2016)

Capital gains tax on the family home ?

Would this also entail a deduction for home loan interest payments ?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-11/capital-gains-tax-reform-could-raise-46-billion-report/7079882


----------



## drsmith (11 January 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Capital gains tax on the family home ?



I'd like to see the modelling which isn't in the brief report.

What for example would be the impact on sales and hence stamp duty and was that part of the modelling ?

As with other areas of taxation, a single element of property taxation cannot be considered in isolation. It needs to be broader than that.


----------



## orr (11 January 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Capital gains tax on the family home ?
> 
> Would this also entail a deduction for home loan interest payments ?
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-11/capital-gains-tax-reform-could-raise-46-billion-report/7079882




Only on the component above that at which the tax would begin to apply. The accounting mathematics(_standards_) on that I'm sure will be designed to make your eye's bleed.
Using the $2mill  threshold figure being put out to test the water begs the question what percentage of the population does that effect? my guess is that it's not the majority. Rise of the populist menace. Or is it democratic will? '_Merd_'och  will decide.


----------



## drsmith (16 January 2016)

Two tax options under consideration by the government,

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/30586979/two-tax-options-on-the-cards-for-aust/

Earlier background information to the above,

http://www.theguardian.com/australi...ions-with-state-premiers-in-bid-to-raise-45bn

I remain of the view that increasing the GST without expanding the base is simply a tax increase and not tax reform and that if it's the outcome would be a major disappointment. From the numbers in the second link, I've calculated that expanding the GST base to include all food and non-alcoholic beverages at the current 10% rate would raise $7bn and would significantly simplify its application in this sector of the economy. If done in conjunction with the second option from the first link (pending the detail), that would raise $12bn and could be a pragmatic first step before considering the GST rate.

First priority for extra GST revenue should be reform of federal/state financial arrangements and in particular the removal of state based nuisance taxes. An example of this could be expanding the GST to water and sewage services and apply the revenue from that towards abolishing state government stamp duties on recurrent products such as insurance.

A compensation package for those on low incomes can be tailored regardless of whether the GST base is expanded or the rate increased (or both) so that's not a specific issue in that distinction. Where other state taxes are removed such as outlined above, that would provide an element of compensation broadly thus helping to assist with this task. 

Some element of any GST increase may need to be used as compensation for low income earners but this would depend on the extent to which the integrity of the income tax base (in part as outlined above) is broadened to fund that element of reform.


----------



## Logique (16 January 2016)

No GST on fresh food was the low income compensation Doc.

Saying "broaden the base but compensate the poor" is just double speak. You can't compensate the poor, a few extra dollars to a few pensioners, that's it.  

However you are correct in saying an increased GST is just a tax grab.

A Labor/Greens government and a carbon tax doesn't seem half so bad as it used to, and the Turnbull ascendancy is no better at curbing spending than the other mob. Who at least didn't victimize low income people like this lot.


----------



## drsmith (17 January 2016)

Logique said:


> Saying "broaden the base but compensate the poor" is just double speak. You can't compensate the poor, a few extra dollars to a few pensioners, that's it.



Compensation can be provided to anyone regardless of whether they are a payer of tax or recipient of welfare. This isn't a point of debate but rather a simple logical consequence of having both tax and welfare within our system of tax transfer.


----------



## Logique (19 January 2016)

Clever writing, and those acronyms will sting:



> Jan 18th 2016
> MICHAEL COPEMAN
> http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2016/01/malcolms-linos-tonys-carpets/
> 
> ...


----------



## Logique (20 January 2016)

Now there's a Windbag-a-thon in the making, each striving to out-rhetoric the other!



> 20 January 2016 - Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull greeted warmly by Barack Obama
> 
> SMH: http://www.smh.com.au/world/prime-m...rack-obama-20160119-gm9i09.html#ixzz3xjl0o32W


----------



## luutzu (20 January 2016)

Logique said:


> Now there's a Windbag-a-thon in the making, each striving to out-rhetoric the other!




The scary thing, I think these politicians actually believe what they're saying.

Heard Turnbull was saying something like: America has never been better. 
No, Mal. You're wrong there.

Obama recently bragged about how US unemployment has been halved. Technically that's true; but if you include those who just gave up hope of finding a job... Playing with numbers like that.


It's exactly like back in the days of Royalties where a good king is one who actually disguise himself as a commoner and walk among his people so as to learn and see first hand how they live and struggle. Then when he comes back to the palace he'd be a bit wiser and not tax them so much.

Now we have these little emperors and their advisors coming back with people's difficulties and all they seem to be doing is ask how they can write speeches and say the right thing but keep doing exactly what they have been doing.

I'm just glad our democratic systems does permit a more peaceful change in gov't and even a political revolution if enough people are upset. Otherwise, the Big and Little Romes around the world will just fall into the big and littler Caesars at the first opportunity. Heck, they might even cross the Rubicon to bring one over (how insane it is that a clown like Trump is currently the frontrunner).


----------



## wayneL (20 January 2016)

Wingbag-a-thon lol.

Let's face it, a politicians only weapon is his wordsmithing and Mal is good at that.

How do you think a worthless BSer like Obama got two terms?

Either way, like I said before. the next  government with be socially democratic. The question is do we want that led my Mal, or... (gasp).... Bill?

Though I'm not awfully fond of some of his ideology, I'm extremely grateful that he'll keep Short'un and Plibicrubi3ugexck out for at least another two terms.


----------



## Logique (23 January 2016)

From their websites, it's not immediately apparent, which political party these members represent. 

Such party loyalists.

http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/
Malcolm Turnbull

http://www.juliebishop.com.au/
Julie Bishop


----------



## Logique (1 February 2016)

Back to SA for you Amanda V. In similar circumstances, you weren't so condemnatory to _Malware_ (sic) were you!

Abbott being feted in Washington btw.

Also, I'm still waiting for Doc & sympathizers, to detail how self-funded retirees, and other low income earners, unless on welfare - how will they be compensated if a 15% GST? 

I can supply the answer - they won't. 



> 31 Jan 2016 - The hounding out of Abbott. Why does the Liberal Left fear him?
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...of_abbott_why_does_the_liberal_left_fear_him/
> 
> Here’s the latest urger, former Minister Amanda Vanstone:
> ...


----------



## Logique (6 February 2016)

As neat a summation of Waleed-ism as you're ever going to read.  And Julie Bishop in another article.



> The moral question that should stop a Leftist posturer: yes, but what would you do instead?  - 6 Feb 2016
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...stop_a_leftist_posturer_yes_but_what_would_y/
> 
> ...The highest morality among today’s dessicated Left is to merely to seem good, usually done simply by calling someone else evil.  The actual consequences of their posturing politics are ignored or deemed irrelevant. The YouTube clicks and likes are enough.
> ...


----------



## dutchie (9 February 2016)

Thank god the Turnbull faction rushed in to dispose of Tony Abbott, so that Turnbull could implement changes.

No of new issues/changes that Turnbull has introduced since the coup,  ZERO!

Turnbull is THE GREAT WAFFLER.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 February 2016)

Fiona Nash (Rural affairs Minister) says she will drop private Health Insurance after last night's Q&A. Maybe that should be extended to sending her kids to public schools, using public transport and selling negatively geared property. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-09/fiona-nash-agrees-to-drop-private-health-cover-on-q&a/7150756


----------



## Knobby22 (9 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Fiona Nash (Rural affairs Minister) says she will drop private Health Insurance after last night's Q&A. Maybe that should be extended to sending her kids to public schools
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-09/fiona-nash-agrees-to-drop-private-health-cover-on-q&a/7150756




Get the public to pay instead? 
Every person who pays for private insurance helps reduce medical costs. She should ne encouraging its take up.
Every child that goes to private schools save the tax payer at least 75% of education costs.


----------



## luutzu (9 February 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> ...
> Every child that goes to private schools save the tax payer at least 75% of education costs.




Does it? I thought the gov't pay roughly the same, just with private the parents pay the gap between private fees and taxpayer funded assistance.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 February 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Get the public to pay instead?
> Every person who pays for private insurance helps reduce medical costs. She should ne encouraging its take up.
> Every child that goes to private schools save the tax payer at least 75% of education costs.




That's another way of looking at it, but politicians are supposed to be looking after the public, the private sector generally looks after themselves. 

I'd prefer the extra cost of a few politicians in the public health system if it results in an improvement in that area.


----------



## drsmith (9 February 2016)

dutchie said:


> Thank god the Turnbull faction rushed in to dispose of Tony Abbott, so that Turnbull could implement changes.
> 
> No of new issues/changes that Turnbull has introduced since the coup,  ZERO!
> 
> Turnbull is THE GREAT WAFFLER.



One needs to wait and see what is actually put up for the next election.

On the GST specifically, the trouble from the start was that state governments (NSW and SA) wanted a rise in the rate to fund additional spending which was a fail on both tax reform and the trajectory of government spending as a proportion of GDP. That's not tax reform and never was.

The primary objective from the outset should have always been to broaden the base to reduce or eliminate inefficient taxes. That would have also had the added benefit of also simplifying the GST.

For a given amount of revenue from any tax, a broader base equates to a lower rate and the government now appears to turning that principal in relation to income tax which is is more sensible than raising the GST rate.


----------



## Knobby22 (9 February 2016)

luutzu said:


> Does it? I thought the gov't pay roughly the same, just with private the parents pay the gap between private fees and taxpayer funded assistance.




Nope, 

_As noted in the just released Productivity Commission's Report on Government Services 2014, while governments invest on average $15,768 per government school student in terms of recurrent costs, the figure for private school students is only $8546. The reality is that even though Catholic and independent schools enrol 34.9 per cent of state and territory students, such schools receive only 22.4 per cent of what state and Commonwealth governments spend on education in terms of recurrent costs.

Instead of private schools ''draining government schools of much needed public resources'', as argued by Luke Mansillo in The Guardian, the fact that such schools exist frees up funds that governments can then redirect to their own schools._

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/comment/wh...-smart-idea-20140203-31x70.html#ixzz3zcxlAFsP 
Follow us: @theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook


----------



## luutzu (9 February 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Nope,
> 
> _As noted in the just released Productivity Commission's Report on Government Services 2014, while governments invest on average $15,768 per government school student in terms of recurrent costs, the figure for private school students is only $8546. The reality is that even though Catholic and independent schools enrol 34.9 per cent of state and territory students, such schools receive only 22.4 per cent of what state and Commonwealth governments spend on education in terms of recurrent costs.
> 
> ...




Is that payment paid directly to the school only? Or total paid to school and the parent through tax deduction or benefits?

I really haven't look at this so only asking because I don't know.

It seem like the "recurrent costs" quoted above define only what gov't sent to the schools on average, and does not include other payments made through assistant to the parents/guardians of the student based on their circumstances.

But anyway, personally I think there shouldn't be any private school (not that it will happen, and as long as there are and I can afford it, will probably send the kids to private school too)... But hypocritical stuff aside, it does society a lot of good to fund all schools equally through a public system.

If parents who could send their kids to private schools are instead sending them to public... and all of us does it... there will be more political pressure to get the schools better funded by the govt etc. Money does go a long way in political influence... and if all parents can send their kids to the same school system...

That and it has the added bonus of kids mingling with bogans and migrants... they might grow up thinking that ey, maybe the poor people aren't poor because they're just stupid or lazy or druggies. Might do the world a lot of good when there are less of the class differences.

Take Vietnam for example. Their public schools are way overcrowded, poorly funded, teachers are poorly paid. But those whose parents could afford it send their kids to extra tuition every single day - the poor kids go to work or help out after the few hours while the rich kids spend almost the same amount of time after formal school to get more schooling - often from the same teacher.

BUt anyway, crazy thoughts.


----------



## Logique (9 February 2016)

drsmith said:


> One needs to wait and see what is actually put up for the next election...
> ...For a given amount of revenue from any tax, a broader base equates to a lower rate and the government now appears to turning that principal in relation to income tax which is is more sensible than raising the GST rate.



You have seen the light Doc, and so has Malcolm Turnbull - until after the election. In the absence of any proposals to reduce government spending, the alternative of raising revenue will remain in play.  

I'll vote for a renewed mandate for the Turnbull government when I see these election planks, progressive tax proposals such as:  
- corporations to pay a fair share of income tax
- a land tax
- an increase in the Medicare levy

Doc, I'm pleased that you have realized, it's hardly fair to build a national economy over the bones of self-funded retirees and low-income earners - i.e. a 15% GST.


----------



## drsmith (9 February 2016)

Logique said:


> You have seen the light Doc, and so has Malcolm Turnbull - until after the election. In the absence of any proposals to reduce government spending, the alternative of raising revenue will remain in play.
> 
> I'll vote for a renewed mandate for the Turnbull government when I see these election planks, progressive tax proposals such as:
> - corporations to pay a fair share of income tax
> ...



You are attempting to present a falsehood by suggesting a reversal in my views during the progress of this discussion on tax reform and in particular the GST.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...=30244&page=26&p=895508&viewfull=1#post895508


----------



## Logique (10 February 2016)

Not deliberately Doc, and thank you for correcting the record.  

At the time, your post #503 gave me a different impression.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 February 2016)

Someone has the $hit$ , and rightly so !

ATO chief lashes multinational companies 'gaming the system' to avoid paying tax in Australia



> Australia's Commissioner of Taxation Chris Jordan has lashed out at multinational companies failing to pay their fair share of tax.
> 
> In a blistering opening statement to a Senate estimates hearing, Mr Jordan rounded on companies he said had been "gaming the system" in order to avoid paying taxes in Australia.
> 
> ...


----------



## luutzu (10 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Someone has the $hit$ , and rightly so !
> 
> ATO chief lashes multinational companies 'gaming the system' to avoid paying tax in Australia




Wow man, the tax chief is crying about the big boys not playing fair. Should we all be scared or angry?

Read the Turnbull gov't is thinking of privatising Medicare admin works out. I would put the "we can't do this well" in the lazy category, the Libs call it being "nimble and agile".


----------



## drsmith (10 February 2016)

Logique said:


> Not deliberately Doc, and thank you for correcting the record.
> 
> At the time, your post #503 gave me a different impression.



It shouldn't have. 

The suggestions in post #503 are entirely consistent with the principals from post #518.


----------



## basilio (10 February 2016)

I think Malcolm Turnball might be starting to smell. 

Even though I don't vote Liberal I have been prepared to give him a go because he is  personally so much more competent than Tony Abbott. But there are issues...

1) I think the decision to emasculate  the CSIRO Climate Research divisions is so breathtakingly wrong headed it can only destroy many intelligent peoples respect for Malcolm's judgement.  If he allows this to happen he is firmly in the camp of CC deniers.  For a politician with the intelligence of Malcolm Turnball to allow such a destruction of essential intellectual resources is incredible.

2)  The kite flying on a GST is also hurting the government.  It is a regressive tax. It will hurt the less well off far more significantly than the wealthy. It's obviously unfair and will be seen as such.

3)  Trying to defend the return of 270 odd women and children to Nauru is just so ugly. I think both Liberal and Labour share the shame on this issue so it would be unfair so say only Malcom will cope the xhit.  But he is in power so that's where it stops.

We'll see what happens.  I reckon the next set of opinion polls will be worth watching. It would be particularly interesting if someone decides to ask some direct questions about the destruction Climate Research, increasing GST and returning the asylum seekers to Nauru.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 February 2016)

I agree with your comments basilio and would also like to point out the arguments of Scott Morrison in Question Time today when asked about negative gearing. He said it was an opportunity for hard working upper middle income earners to provide for their retirement and this should be encouraged by negative gearing. 

I wonder whether he thinks that hard working lower income earners who have to pay rent to his protected species of comfortably off landlords are bludgers on society ? These people are deprived of the opportunity of owning their own homes and then become burdens on the welfare system in later life. 

So sure, tax those bludgers more by increasing the GST, but leave the silvertails and their tax perks alone.

Incredible hypocrisy.


----------



## noco (11 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I agree with your comments basilio and would also like to point out the arguments of Scott Morrison in Question Time today when asked about negative gearing. He said it was an opportunity for hard working upper middle income earners to provide for their retirement and this should be encouraged by negative gearing.
> 
> I wonder whether he thinks that hard working lower income earners who have to pay rent to his protected species of comfortably off landlords are bludgers on society ? These people are deprived of the opportunity of owning their own homes and then become burdens on the welfare system in later life.
> 
> ...




How do you know if those low income earners have not blown there money on grog, gambling and smoking. I know of low income earners who have affordable housing who don't pay rent, drink, gamble or smoke....Those who have to pay rent are, in most cases, plain stupid....They are not deprived from owning their own homes....The ones who HAVE to pay rent as you say are depriving themselves by not being thrifty...Bully for them.

I thought the increase in the GST was off the Federal agenda?......It seems to be still firmly on the Labor premier of South Australia agenda...Jay Wetheral wants the 15%.


----------



## Logique (11 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> ...would also like to point out the arguments of Scott Morrison in Question Time today when asked about negative gearing. He said it was an opportunity for hard working upper middle income earners to provide for their retirement and this should be encouraged by negative gearing.
> I wonder whether he thinks that hard working lower income earners who have to pay rent to his protected species of comfortably off landlords are bludgers on society ? These people are deprived of the opportunity of owning their own homes and then become burdens on the welfare system in later life.
> So sure, tax those bludgers more by increasing the GST, but leave the silvertails and their tax perks alone.
> Incredible hypocrisy.



Agree. The same "hard working upper middle income earners" would receive a tax break under an increased GST. _They_ poor loves, would be compensated.  And people said the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd government was wealth redistributive!

If the Coalition government wants a genuine review of the tax system, then negative gearing should be on the table. It's a perk, available to a select few, including heaps of pollies. 

It's time some of the claims about negative gearing and housing supply were tested. What are they afraid of?

I'll tell you who lives in the negatively geared holiday homes - short stay tourism visitors, because they'll pay more. These cottages aren't usually let to permanent tenants at affordable rents.


----------



## Tisme (11 February 2016)

Logique said:


> Agree. The same "hard working upper middle income earners" would receive a tax break under an increased GST. _They_ poor loves, would be compensated.  And people said the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd government was wealth redistributive!
> 
> If the Coalition government wants a genuine review of the tax system, then negative gearing should be on the table. It's a perk, available to a select few, including heaps of pollies.
> 
> ...




There's 153 thousand federal public servants, averaging $81k a year for 37 hours (including PD course every second day), plus salary sacrifice, plus super underpinned by the sale of our assets like Telstra, plus expenses, plus, plus, plus. versus average $74k a year for the non govt workers doing a whole lot more actual hours and unsecured superannuation. 

Then there are the state and local govt employees. many of whom also own the flats that are negatively geared.

No one is going to touch negative gearing because the pollies would have a rebellion from the people who do all their clerical and spin.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 February 2016)

Tisme said:


> No one is going to touch negative gearing because the pollies would have a rebellion from the people who do all their clerical and spin.




Not to mention the politicians themselves.

At least Labor and the Greens are making some noises about doing something about it, and the pressure should be kept on them to translate that into some action.


----------



## Tisme (11 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Not to mention the politicians themselves.
> 
> At least Labor and the Greens are making some noises about doing something about it, and the pressure should be kept on them to translate that into some action.




And the ATO figures showing average income are skewed because they are netted against the negative gearing. There's a lot of people who earn less than $20k a year declaring rental income too; no guessing they are the savvy business owners who perk everything from the P&L.


----------



## drsmith (12 February 2016)

basilio said:


> I think Malcolm Turnball might be starting to smell.
> 
> Even though I don't vote Liberal I have been prepared to give him a go because he is  personally so much more competent than Tony Abbott. But there are issues...
> 
> ...



It's been a messy week for the government primarily due to Scott Morrison's resistance in relation to the GST rate and Stuart Robert. Leaks during the week indicate internal tension where it is very much not needed.

On other issues above,

1) CSIRO staffing changes seem to be an initiative of the CEO. 

3) The alternative is people smuggling with boats on the seas with all the consequences that carries and the best answer is not to break what was fixed as Labor did in office. 

The longer we go without boat arrivals, the closer we get to the situation we were in at the and of the Howard Government. Refugee advocacy individuals and groups should realise that the closer we get to this point, the greater is the opportunity for the government to apply discretion in specific cases without compromising the overall objective. For some of that advocacy however, the objective is very different to that of the government regardless of the consequences. In the absence of an alternative that maintains border security, the political decision for yourself and others with similar views is to decide which camp you are in.

Hopefully this weekend's reshuffle will clear the remaining barnacles from the leadership change.


----------



## Knobby22 (12 February 2016)

I don't think the GST talk hurt the Government.
It was only the big end of town and some of the State Governments pushing it, purely to get the money to spend in the case of the State or grant tax cuts to Australian companies.

The whole reasoning was spurious as previously argued some time back in the GST thread.
Turnbull has done the right thing and he only looks better for it.


----------



## drsmith (12 February 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> I don't think the GST talk hurt the Government.



While the right decision has been made regarding the GST rate, it became a bit messy with back bench concerns becoming public last ween and Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison not quiet singing from the same hymn sheet this week. Scott though is still relatively new to economic debate and can grow from the experience.

Of interest in the treasury modelling,



> The modelling, presented in a January 25 Treasury ministerial brief, assumed an increase in the GST from 10% to 15%, and broadening its base to include water and sewerage. This would raise $35 billion. It further assumed $6 billion in assistance to households automatically generated from indexed pension payments, leaving the rest for personal income tax cuts.
> 
> The higher GST rate would cut 1.2% off GDP, and the automatic CPI indexation of transfer payments and grants would slice off another 0.1%, according to the modelling. The modest base broadening to water and sewerage would add 0.07%, while the income tax cuts would add 1.3%. This left a bottom line of no addition to GDP.




https://theconversation.com/treasury-modelling-shows-no-growth-lift-from-gst-tax-mix-switch-54574

I'd like to see the results from broadening the base more broadly assuming that was undertaken as part of the analysis.


----------



## Knobby22 (12 February 2016)

drsmith said:


> I'd like to see the results from broadening the base more broadly assuming that was undertaken as part of the analysis.




Yes, I agree, some broadening of the base is warranted.

Also I don't think it has hurt Turnbull as he now looks like the guy who stopped it.


----------



## basilio (12 February 2016)

> 1) CSIRO staffing changes seem to be an initiative of the CEO.  Dr Smith




Yep they were an initiative from the new CSIRO CEO.  In fact there is a big part of me that thinks his selection as CEO was largely due to his gungho business direction and willingness to drop  broader research programs even when these are critically important to the rest of the Australian economy. 

*I think it is an absolute disaster to destroy the CC research programs in Australia.* We will need every bit of local knowledge to cope with the changes that are happening. If for whatever reason someone decides that the CSIRO can't do it perhaps flick it to the BOM - with the necessary resources.

In my view Malcolm Turnball will be made very aware of just how wrong this decision is and unless he takes constructive steps to allow climate research to continue his credibility as a thinking politician is in tatters. It's an indefensible position for someone like Malcolm.


----------



## wayneL (13 February 2016)

basilio said:


> Yep they were an initiative from the new CSIRO CEO.  In fact there is a big part of me that thinks his selection as CEO was largely due to his gungho business direction and willingness to drop  broader research programs even when these are critically important to the rest of the Australian economy.
> 
> *I think it is an absolute disaster to destroy the CC research programs in Australia.* We will need every bit of local knowledge to cope with the changes that are happening. If for whatever reason someone decides that the CSIRO can't do it perhaps flick it to the BOM - with the necessary resources.
> 
> In my view Malcolm Turnball will be made very aware of just how wrong this decision is and unless he takes constructive steps to allow climate research to continue his credibility as a thinking politician is in tatters. It's an indefensible position for someone like Malcolm.




I agree, where are those poor bastards on the gravy train going to get a job now?


----------



## basilio (13 February 2016)

wayneL said:


> I agree, where are those poor bastards on the gravy train going to get a job now?




I'm sure that was just an elaborate joke Wayne . After all we don't call all the other scientists in the CSIRO "on a gravy train" do we? Just highly skilled professionals doing research that hopefully adds to our clever country.

To highlight why Australia and the world needs our CC research to continue check out the following


> *
> CSIRO climate cuts 'devastating', almost 3000 scientists tell Malcolm Turnbull*
> 
> Date
> ...




http://www.smh.com.au/environment/c...ts-tell-malcolm-turnbull-20160211-gms3ea.html


----------



## wayneL (13 February 2016)

basilio said:


> I'm sure that was just an elaborate joke Wayne . After all we don't call all the other scientists in the CSIRO "on a gravy train" do we? Just highly skilled professionals doing research that hopefully adds to our clever country.
> 
> To highlight why Australia and the world needs our CC research to continue check out the following
> 
> ...




Advocacy is not clever. Expensive, but not clever.

ETA - BTW I have clients that work as scientists at CSIRO Pinjarra Hills. You would be very upset if I told you their opinion. BWTFWTK


----------



## basilio (13 February 2016)

Re-framing Climate research as advocacy is *Lying *

I don't give a stuff about alleged comments from other CSIRO scientists. 

I do believe that the overwhelming body of people in the science and broader community would accept that we have a very real problem with Climate Change and that continuing research to work out local effects and what we need to do to survive is critical information.  And if Malcolm Turnball doesn't believe that and act on it appropriately  he is toast.


----------



## wayneL (13 February 2016)

basilio said:


> Re-framing Climate research as advocacy is *Lying *
> 
> I don't give a stuff about alleged comments from other CSIRO scientists.
> 
> I do believe that the overwhelming body of people in the science and broader community would accept that we have a very real problem with Climate Change and that continuing research to work out local effects and what we need to do to survive is critical information.  And if Malcolm Turnball doesn't believe that and act on it appropriately  he is toast.




Lying, you mean like Cookie's consensus study? You don't want to go there bas, there is a mountain of dirt on the climate establishment matey.


----------



## Chickensoup (13 February 2016)

We don't need more climate scientists. We need more research into clean energy.

If we established a meteor was plummeting towards Earth and was going to kill off all life, we wouldn't require scientists to continue studying the impact it would have. We would need people designing rockets to obliterate it from the sky.

Once you've proven your hypothesis, it's redundant to keep on proving it correct. Sure, keep some of the climate scientists to continue taking measurements. But we need to move on. Otherwise we'll just keep on studying this meteor all the way until it hits us in the face.

Research into clean energy is the solution. We don't need more computer simulations of climate change.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 February 2016)

Chickensoup said:


> We don't need more climate scientists. We need more research into clean energy.
> 
> If we established a meteor was plummeting towards Earth and was going to kill off all life, we wouldn't require scientists to continue studying the impact it would have. We would need people designing rockets to obliterate it from the sky.
> 
> ...




I tend to agree that a division of resources is required.

I'd like to see some of the savings in this restructure (if there are any) going into developing geo-thermal energy which is a game changer and could supply base load  power for thousands of years.

What are we waiting for ?


----------



## Sean K (13 February 2016)

I'm really liking Barnaby's appointment. He's such a great Australian character. Can't wait till Malcolm goes on leave and he's running the shop. Finally a couple of witty, sharp lovable modern Australians to fly the flag. I'm tipping a three term partnership. Potentially the longest in Australian history.


----------



## Logique (13 February 2016)

basilio said:


> Re-framing Climate research as advocacy is *Lying *...



Unlike the claim that 97% of scientists agree with AGW I suppose.

How quickly the "settled" science became un-settled, once jobs were at risk.


----------



## basilio (13 February 2016)

Logique said:


> Unlike the claim that 97% of scientists agree with AGW I suppose.
> 
> How quickly the "settled" science became un-settled, once jobs were at risk.




That was true then, it is probably more accurate now,.

All you are doing Logique and Wayne is echoing rubbish analysis by climate change deniers who can't stand the fact that the overwhelming majority of scientists in this field see current CC as real, dangerous and largely human produced.

But this thread is about Malcolm Turnballs government. In theory he also accepts the science on this topic. My initial comment was that by allowing this decimation of CC research in the Southern Hemisphere to go ahead Malcolm was 

1) Destroying our capacity to understand what was happening to Australia in local areas
2) Destroying his credibility as politician who understood and respected science


----------



## SirRumpole (13 February 2016)

basilio said:


> That was true then, it is probably more accurate now,.
> 
> All you are doing Logique and Wayne is echoing rubbish analysis by climate change deniers who can't stand the fact that the overwhelming majority of scientists in this field see current CC as real, dangerous and largely human produced.
> 
> ...




Surely there are different forms of science ?

1. Applied science is putting our knowledge to in use solving problems.

2. Theoretical science is measuring inputs and outputs and developing models that link the inputs and outputs.

They are both important but if we don't do 1. at some stage then 2. will have been for nothing.


----------



## wayneL (13 February 2016)

basilio said:


> That was true then, it is probably more accurate now,.
> 
> All you are doing Logique and Wayne is echoing rubbish analysis by climate change deniers who can't stand the fact that the overwhelming majority of scientists in this field see current CC as real, dangerous and largely human produced.
> 
> ...




Oh goodness gracious bas, of course, the deniers, the deniers. Thanks for the giggle.

I actually go along chickensoup and Horace (on a different basis perhaps, but nevertheless), we could do more research on renewables.

Positive stuff instead of needlessly scaring kiddies into topping themselves.


----------



## explod (13 February 2016)

wayneL said:


> Positive stuff instead of needlessly scaring kiddies into topping themselves.




Continuing to use this one waynel is absolutely disgusting and leads one to believe it may have been a story concocted by you for effect. 



Those touched by real hardship and grief rarely want to express it;   and particularly in public. 

But then in the face of obvious climate change before our very eyes then the sheer blindness of some is a bit hard to fathom also.


----------



## wayneL (13 February 2016)

explod said:


> Continuing to use this one waynel is absolutely disgusting and leads one to believe it may have been a story concocted by you for effect.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Thanks plod, I will give the parents your comments.


----------



## explod (13 February 2016)

wayneL said:


> Thanks plod, I will give the parents your comments.




I am sure they will be charmed at your use of thier demise to support your arguments.  

Very hollow ole Pal.


----------



## wayneL (13 February 2016)

explod said:


> I am sure they will be charmed at your use of thier demise to support your arguments.
> 
> Very hollow ole Pal.




It wasn't thier (sic) demise "pal", it was their child's. Feel good about yourself "pal"?


----------



## fraa (13 February 2016)

Dont really have a strong opinion either way, I just find it amusing that 

1. On an investment/stock forum, consensus is seen to be a reliable proxy for "correctness".
2. For the scientific framework is to stand, consensus must be irrelevant. i.e. scientific progression is ALWAYS contrarian and against consensus (otherwise it will not be progress & the underlying science will not change !). People seem to ignore this.

Its really odd because the certain renewable energy themes are actually much more inline with the far Right in the USA then the Left. Think about the central concepts (i.e. Solar)

1. Significant parts of renewable energy is decentralised. This is thematically consistent with the Right's preference for the decentralisation of power (i.e. States rights).
2. Due to decentralisation, no central authority can curtail your freedom (i.e. there is no central grid or power station to shutdown, with decentralised mini grids like solar + tesla power banks, "the man" finds it harder to shut you down). Again, very much a theme of the right.
3. Geographically parts of the right voter base (i.e. hunters, country dwellers) reside in areas much more suited to decentralised renewable energy then centralised power generation. 

This is in contrast to much of the urban left that dwells in cities which are much more suitable for centralised power generation which are predominately dirty.

Issue is really politicization - with tribalism in politics once 1 tribe aligns itself with one side of the debate, the other tribe MUST oppose it regardless of the underlying. Once Al Gore aligned himself to the issue, an instant political roadblock to the issue was guaranteed.


----------



## Logique (14 February 2016)

Fair comment Fraa.  

Climate realists have never opposed solar.  That's just the warmists verballing the 'deniers'.


----------



## orr (14 February 2016)

Logique said:


> Fair comment....
> 
> realists .....





Any body keeping count of the number of ministers that have been sacked, embarrassed out of office, jimmy barred out of the speakers chair or just skulked of in shame(saying one thing as minister then back flipping '_ambassador no balls_') for this first Abbott/Turnbull term.

I'm checking for realists...Denialists skeptics and the deluded need not reply. Just the raw number. And is it a record in a first term???  Add up the Dolts and _'Charge'_

Back on topic team.

And Fraa, there was a time when there was more mercury(Hg) used in enema's than in thermometers and alas we are all still dealing with the consequences. The soon to be outgoing CEO of the CSIRO is a regular adherent to the practice.


----------



## Logique (15 February 2016)

In deference to Joe, I might go to the Climate Hysteria thread.

Meanwhile, the honeymoon might be over for Lord Wentworth.  Also Ross Gittins' SMH article today about the real reason for the GST 'not being tinkered with', is right on the money, as it were.



> Fairfax-Ipsos poll: *voters cool on Malcolm Turnbull *as Coalition support drops below 2013 election levels - February 15, 2016
> 
> A summer marred by ministerial crises and the prospect of a higher GST has taken the shine off the Turnbull government, sending the *Coalition's share of the vote below that achieved by Tony Abbott at the 2013 election*...
> 
> Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ion-levels-20160214-gmtnd1.html#ixzz40BVtpasu


----------



## Tisme (15 February 2016)

I think Malcolm better get to the polls, now he's cleared out anyone with a breadcrumb trail to Jamie Briggs, Mal Brough and Stuart Robert. His party popularity is on the down ramp as he dithers his way to a challenge by Tony.


----------



## Knobby22 (15 February 2016)

Logique said:


> In deference to Joe, I might go to the Climate Hysteria thread.
> 
> Meanwhile, the honeymoon might be over for Lord Wentworth.  Also Ross Gittins' SMH article today about the real reason for the GST 'not being tinkered with', is right on the money, as it were.




Yes, its a bad idea achieving nothing and Turnbull isn't fool enough to do it.

It annoys me that the right wing are saying his dithering and the socialists think they have him running scared. As the article said, it was decided a long time ago. We need him to push through reforms that advantage the economy. Hopefully he is given a go and Murdoch, Tony etc. get off his back.

BTW Tony was seen talking to Obama. Sure he was at a function with 200 other people and was invited to be on Murdochs table and it was only shaking his had which everyone did but don't let that spoil a good story. Tony is a bigger fool than I thought if he thinks this is helping his cause.


----------



## drsmith (15 February 2016)

With Labor having entered the negative gearing debate it poses an interesting question in relation to the timing and nature of the government's policies.

On deductions in general, the government appears to be looking at a universal cap without full grandfathering. Another important difference from the noises coming from the government is that the resultant income tax base broadening would be directed at reducing marginal tax rates which is an important component left out of Labor's proposal.

A transitional approach to eliminating deductions from wage an salary income could be to reduce both the deductions cap over time eventually reaching zero and hence reduce marginal tax rates in the same way. 

We haven't seen anything yet from the government in relation to CGT, but Labor's proposal which has an element of merit for investments in the short-medium term (1 to 3 years) will hopefully spark the government into action here. The present discount is essentially biased too greatly towards the short-medium term.

The present CGT discount is detrimental to long term capital discount as it taxes gains within inflation if an asset is held long enough. Labor's proposal of simply reducing the discount it makes this worse.

I'd like to see two elements of reform to CGT.

Firstly, CPI indexation of the cost base should be reintroduced so only real capital gain is taxed. Secondly, a discount should remain for short to medium term investments but the present discount needs to be tweaked as it is too great in the shorter term (1 to 3 years) leading to speculation in this time frame that has helped to fuel residential property. 

The CGT discount should be tiered for the early years of the investment and capped such that the ultimate rate of tax at the top marginal tax rate is below the corporate rate but not excessively. Ken Henry's 40% discount is probably ideal in this regard.

As an example, CGT discount tiers could be,

0 to 1yr: Nil, as is the case now.
1 to 2yr: 10%
2 to 3yr: 20%.
3 to 4yr: 30%.
4yr+ 40%. 

The choice for the taxpayer between the discount and CPI indexation would the option that delivers the lowest tax result. 

These options taken together would help to restore a more appropriate balance of CGT treatment relative to the timeframe an investment is held with the discount whilst providing a level of incentive in the medium term that pure GST indexation lacks.

Over time, if the top rate of income tax is reduced closer to the corporate rate, the above discount rates could be further reduced with the aim ultimately of eliminating the discount element altogether.


----------



## Knobby22 (15 February 2016)

I like your thinking Dr Smith.


----------



## Tisme (15 February 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Yes, its a bad idea achieving nothing and Turnbull isn't fool enough to do it.
> 
> It annoys me that the right wing are saying his dithering and the socialists think they have him running scared. As the article said, it was decided a long time ago. We need him to push through reforms that advantage the economy. Hopefully he is given a go and Murdoch, Tony etc. get off his back.
> 
> BTW Tony was seen talking to Obama. Sure he was at a function with 200 other people and was invited to be on Murdochs table and it was only shaking his had which everyone did but don't let that spoil a good story. Tony is a bigger fool than I thought if he thinks this is helping his cause.




50 people. The club has 200 members.


----------



## Knobby22 (15 February 2016)

True and Obama didn't even eat with them.


----------



## banco (16 February 2016)

Whatever tinkering Turnbull decides to do around the edges of the tax system (and he seems to be terrified of doing anything more than tinkering) isn't going to be enough to pay for the current level of Government spending.


----------



## drsmith (16 February 2016)

What Shorty and Labor are still opposing in the Senate of their own budget measures from their time in office is a greater loss to the budget than the gains their negative gearing and CGT proposal would raise over the 4 year forward estimates.

While the above isn't a direct point of relevance about the current government, it does offer some perspective.

On matters budget and tax, Scott Morrison will at the podium at the National Press Club tomorrow.

https://npc.org.au/speakers/scott-morrison/


----------



## SirRumpole (17 February 2016)

Superannuation benefits for the ultra-rich are 'obscene'


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-17/super-benefits-for-ultra-rich/7177882


----------



## Logique (19 February 2016)

The PM is hosting New Zealand PM John Key at Point Piper for a sleep-over.

The cost to Australian taxpayers may be calculated via:  http://gstcal.co.nz/


----------



## drsmith (20 February 2016)

An ANU analysis of Labor's recently announced NG and CGT policies offer some insight on what the budget impact of a cap on NG rental deductions would raise,



> An alternative to removing negative gearing (amongst several) is to cap the rental losses. We find that capping rental losses at $20,000 in 2017-18 would impact only around 10 per cent of negatively geared investors but increase tax revenue by around $1 billion each year. Capping losses at $50,000 would yield $300 million in extra taxation revenue.




http://rsss.anu.edu.au/sites/defaul...lling _Negative_Gearing_and_Capital_Gains.pdf

Page 7.

More broadly, a piece in the SMH outlines the overall scope of deductions claimed, 



> Today, more than 80 per cent of Australia's 12.8 million taxpayers  claim deductions when they lodge their tax returns.
> 
> In 2012-13, total deductions of $31.3 billion were claimed by personal taxpayers against $704 billion in taxable income, with an average amount claimed of $3025.
> 
> ...




http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-...rclaiming-tax-deductions-20160218-gmy9ax.html

The sum of the components above is greater than the total (the numbers don't add up), but the scale of the above illustrates the scope for reform.


----------



## MrBurns (21 February 2016)

Malcolm is wrong on negative gearing and it might cost him the election.


----------



## drsmith (21 February 2016)

MrBurns said:


> Malcolm is wrong on negative gearing and it might cost him the election.



They need to go to the election with a policy on it an I'd suggest they will, most likely in the form of a cap without grandfathering. While I don't expect it will form part of initial policy, reducing the cap over time is then an option.

Labor's NG policy sounds nice in the usual progressive way, but then so did pink batts, softer asylum seeker policy and 93% FTTP just to name a few. These either struggled on implementation or had major unintended adverse consequences.

I can think of a number of potential adverse outcomes in relation to their NG policy as follows,

1) By not applying it across all investment classes, opportunities will remain for wage earners to chase NG gearing opportunities outside of established residential housing and investment spruikers will take up that opportunity. This could result in a misallocation or resources and investment losses, both to income earners and the government. Those failed forestry investments of a decade or so ago come to mind here.

2) The market impact maintaining unrestricted NG on a small area such as new homes and the price distortions that could create.

Both the above could at least be partially mitigated by some refinement to Labor's policy. Firstly, such a policy if applied should be applied across all investment classes. If from that standpoint, an argument of economic merit can be established for a specific investment sector (such as new housing), there should be restrictions (a cap is an example) such that a misallocation of resources is prevented.

3) The impact such a large change could have on residential investment. 

Residential housing is in my view presently a bubble. While this needs to be overcome with time, dramatic changes in government policy run the risk of pricking it. This is where a more cautious and considered approach is needed.

4) Implementation problems.

The advanced announcement of a start up date to such a significant change is likely to lead to investment distortions both before and after the start up date. this adds both budget risk and sector risk with the latter compounding 3 above. Essentially, demand in the lead up to the cut off date could result in a further temporary inflation of house prices followed by an investment downturn afterwards. The budget implications are obvious as is the additional risk to the housing market.

Labor's proposed halving of the CG discount is a negative in relation to future long term investment but this aspect could be significantly improved by either adding CPI to the cost base before calculating any CG and applying the reduced discount or having the CPI indexed cost base as an alternative option for investors. Either of the above would also reduce the need to grandfather existing investments.

It's good though that Labor have entered the broader tax debate as it's likely to deliver an overall result of some form in this area. That and their superior political mobilisation is giving the Turnbull administration a bit of political grief at the moment but the Turnbull government should be up to the task of dealing with that. There's nothing wrong with a government being kept on its toes.


----------



## MrBurns (21 February 2016)

Malcolm said the the ALP has an agenda to bring house prices down

I think millions of people would have said "great"

The problem now is the foreign buyers will be rushing in to buy in case the ALP gets in, and before the new laws come into force in 2017......this will blow the bubble out even more.


----------



## Logique (21 February 2016)

MrBurns said:


> Malcolm said the the ALP has an agenda to bring house prices down
> 
> I think millions of people would have said "great"
> 
> The problem now is the foreign buyers will be rushing in to buy in case the ALP gets in, and before the new laws come into force in 2017......this will blow the bubble out even more.



Agree on both counts Burnsy


----------



## Knobby22 (22 February 2016)

MrBurns said:


> Malcolm said the the ALP has an agenda to bring house prices down
> 
> I think millions of people would have said "great"
> 
> The problem now is the foreign buyers will be rushing in to buy in case the ALP gets in, and before the new laws come into force in 2017......this will blow the bubble out even more.




Yes, Burnsie.  
Labor have finally after fluffing about for years somehow come out with some decent policies. 
Just shows that their team aren't as hopeless as the Gillard/Rudd teams.

If Malcolm is stopped from implementing good policies by the right then they will lose.
I do think they will come up with some policies. Malcolm understands how government distorts the playing field and if the far right thought about it, they should be for less government market interference.


----------



## Logique (22 February 2016)

Oh my..


> *The Turnbull flop: Labor now tied with Liberals in Newspoll*  - 22 Feb 2016
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...lop_labor_now_tied_with_liberals_in_newspoll/
> 
> ..Based on preference flows from the last election, the Coalition and Labor are tied in two-party terms at 50 per cent each..


----------



## MrBurns (22 February 2016)

Logique said:


> Oh my..





If the ALP can get rid of Bill they will also get rid of Malcolm I think.


----------



## Knobby22 (22 February 2016)

MrBurns said:


> If the ALP can get rid of Bill they will also get rid of Malcolm I think.




Bring Tony back? 
Bolt is so happy on his blog he is wetting himself. If he attacks hard enough maybe he can get Labor in.
It just goes to show that the latest Labor effort is fairly electable.

The media keep attacking for not bringing down the budget plans, they can wait. It has to be written properly and be carefully considered. I find it all a bit pathetic.

Excellent article today by Ross Gittens on what he thinks Turnbull is planning (based on hints) and it looks a winner. It doesn't involve cutting company taxes so the multinationals are not happy. 
Did you notice that Scott Morrison has also got a bill now to take away multinational company assets and sell them if they refuse to pay their share of taxes?


----------



## MrBurns (22 February 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Bring Tony back?
> Bolt is so happy on his blog he is wetting himself. If he attacks hard enough maybe he can get Labor in.
> It just goes to show that the latest Labor effort is fairly electable.
> 
> ...




I hope something happens soon, I'm losing faith in the lot of them, I'd back Shorten on the negative gearing policy but I'd be worried he'd stuff everything else up.....and lets face it he would.


----------



## banco (22 February 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Bring Tony back?
> Bolt is so happy on his blog he is wetting himself. If he attacks hard enough maybe he can get Labor in.
> It just goes to show that the latest Labor effort is fairly electable.
> 
> ...




They ruled out changes to capital gains today so they really don't have many arrows left.


----------



## Bob (23 February 2016)

MrBurns said:


> I hope something happens soon, I'm losing faith in the lot of them, I'd back Shorten on the negative gearing policy but I'd be worried he'd stuff everything else up.....and lets face it he would.




Why would you do that?  Back Shorten on anything, let alone a policy that creates employment.


----------



## Bob (23 February 2016)

Finally, the truth about negative gearing.......This was written by Scott Morrison when he was the Social Services Minister.....




There is an urban myth running around that negative gearing is the province of the rich and should be for ‘the high jump’.

The facts are that negative gearing is used by middle income Australians, particularly younger Australians, to try and get ahead and build a financial future for themselves and, their families while providing a much needed capital injection for new stock into our housing market.

As Social Services Minister I have an interest in this issue. The more Australians take responsibility for themselves, the less they will call on taxpayers in the future to draw down on welfare benefits.

We already require eight out of ten income taxpayers to go to work every day to pay for our welfare bill. Where Australians try to build their wealth and finances for their own retirement we should just say thanks, rather than putting them in our tax sights.

According to statistics from the Australians Taxation Office and cited by the Property Council, of the almost 1.26 million Australians who declare a net rental loss, 883,325 earn around $80,000 or less a year and around 80 per cent of them negatively gear. Also, of the 1.87 million people who declare a net rental interest, over 70 per cent earn about $80,000 or less.

The majority of Australians who declare a net rental loss, almost 73 per cent, only own one investment property. A further 18 per cent only own two investment properties – hardly property barons.

A breakdown of net rental losses by occupation shows average workers make up the majority. They include 62,000 clerical staff, 54,000 teachers, 47,000 salespeople, 36,000 nurses, and tens of thousands of hospitality workers.

Most people who declare a net rental loss are also aged 40 or under.

Middle-income earners declaring net rental interest are also providing housing for other Australians through their investment and at the same time looking to provide for their own retirement incomes, reducing reliance on government.

To gain a better perspective of the role negative gearing plays in our housing market it is worth looking at how things work in other parts of the world.

In the US, institutional investors, pension funds and listed real estate investment trusts (REITs) are key investors in residential accommodation. Apartments represent around 13% of REIT holdings and of the major pension funds in the US who invest in real estate, 20% of their allocation to real estate in 2012 was invested in apartments.

European research shows institutions own 17% of all rental housing stock in Germany, 23% in Switzerland, and 37% in the Netherlands. In the UK, some of the largest institutions invest in rental housing.

By contrast the Australian stock exchange does not have one listed property trust providing residential rental accommodation and super funds owning residential rental accommodation are also absent.

Sure, Stockland and Mirvac, as well as Australian Super and CBus develop property, but they sell it off to investors including mums and dads.

The industry has said tax laws make it difficult for institutions to invest in residential properties as the tax office sees residential property as more a capital than income investment. Also the yield on residential is too low compared to commercial property. This means our institutions favour commercial property. 

Thankfully, negative gearing has given mums and dads on modest incomes an incentive to invest in residential property and take up the slack. Given the tax treatment they seem to be happy to accept a lower yield than institutional investors.

So before we all get too carried away with seeking to further extend the reach of the tax base to Australians who are out there having a go, working hard and making the most of what they have got to make a future for themselves, let’s think again.

Whether they be superannuants simply drawing an income from investments they have accumulated that Labor now propose to tax, or to target mum and dad negative gearing investors, we need to remember these are the people who are actually out there having a go. They are acquiring these investments by working, earning an income, and then investing it after paying tax on it. These Australians are the solution, not the problem.
 The arguments to tax them more may seem attractive to Labor and those who assess these policies in the hermetically sealed confines of academic offices and econometric models, but when it comes to assessing it against the lived experience of Australians, it’s not hard to come to a different conclusion.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 February 2016)

Bob said:


> Finally, the truth about negative gearing.......This was written by Scott Morrison when he was the Social Services Minister.....
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The median income in Australia is $45k.

Morrison likes to say that NG benefits people with a TAXABLE income of $80k. This taxable income is AFTER the negative gearing loss was taken off, so those using NG would have a gross income of about $90k or DOUBLE what most people are getting, if they just claim NG for one house.

Furthermore they own their own residence which they can sell later or reverse mortgage to finance their retirement and at the same time they are depriving others of doing the same. All the people forced to rent and never being able to own their own home will be a drain on the social security system in later life.

NG as currently implemented is a rort. If it's constrained to new premises it may add to housing stock, but the vast majority of NG is claimed on existing premises to the detriment of the Federal budget and first home buyers.

Labors reforms are sensible. The house price bubble won't burst, but it may be slowly deflated so that housing becomes affordable again.


----------



## Tisme (23 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The median income in Australia is $45k.
> 
> Morrison likes to say that NG benefits people with a TAXABLE income of $80k. This taxable income is AFTER the negative gearing loss was taken off, so those using NG would have a gross income of about $90k or DOUBLE what most people are getting, if they just claim NG for one house.
> 
> ...




I never found negative gearing anything but rats and mice income.


----------



## Tisme (23 February 2016)

Should be front page news : "Six top Libs hold 99 negatively geared properties", you know the mum and dad investors.


----------



## Bob (23 February 2016)

Tisme said:


> Should be front page news : "Six top Libs hold 99 negatively geared properties", you know the mum and dad investors.




NG is available to anyone who has assessable income and who are trying to secure their retirement, and not go on a government pension (welfare).


----------



## Tisme (23 February 2016)

Bob said:


> NG is available to anyone who has assessable income and who are trying to secure their retirement, and not go on a government pension (welfare).




So is the stock market, working for a living, charity, etc, but I doubt very much the people who live hand to mouth will qualify for an interest only loan to become a land lord....thus why I would suggest most geared properties are probably in the hands of over paid public servants.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 February 2016)

Bob said:


> NG is available to anyone who has assessable income and who are trying to secure their retirement, and not go on a government pension (welfare).




So why can't they do that by owning only their own residence and reverse mortgaging or selling it to finance their retirement ?


----------



## Bob (23 February 2016)

Tisme said:


> So is the stock market, working for a living, charity, etc, but I doubt very much the people who live hand to mouth will qualify for an interest only loan to become a land lord....thus why I would suggest most geared properties are probably in the hands of over paid public servants.




It is actually mainly used by people who have went without to purchase a property and after struggling with school fees and mortgage use some of the equity they have accrued as a deposit on an income.  You might want to read Terry McCrann's article in today's Telegraph on neg. gearing.  Over paid public servants - save me !!!!!!


----------



## Bob (23 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> So why can't they do that by owning only their own residence and reverse mortgaging or selling it to finance their retirement ?




They can do that as well and reward themselves by having investment income from properties and a reverse mortgage.  I think we are all forgetting that there is some tax benefits in negative gearing but also there is CGT payable when a property is sold.  Also, if negative gearing is restricted to new properties only it will be difficult for an investor to sell as then it becomes an existing property (along with 1000's of others).


----------



## SirRumpole (23 February 2016)

Bob said:


> They can do that as well and reward themselves by having investment income from properties and a reverse mortgage.  I think we are all forgetting that there is some tax benefits in negative gearing but also there is CGT payable when a property is sold.  Also, if negative gearing is restricted to new properties only it will be difficult for an investor to sell as then it becomes an existing property (along with 1000's of others).




Sure that's good for the investors, but not  the national interest because you then have generations of renters who won't be able to own their own homes and therefore will have to rely on social security.

Investors will still be able to sell their was new but now existing properties, but it will be to owner occupiers, and they probably won't get the inflated price they would have got if they sold to investors, but that's their tough luck as they reduced their tax liability anyway by negative gearing deductions.


----------



## Tisme (23 February 2016)

Bob said:


> It is actually mainly used by people who have went without to purchase a property and after struggling with school fees and mortgage use some of the equity they have accrued as a deposit on an income.  You might want to read Terry McCrann's article in today's Telegraph on neg. gearing.  Over paid public servants - save me !!!!!!




Predictable nerve hit 

I'd be interested if you can provide evidence to the contrary on my two salient points:

1. negative gearing is not in the domain of "anyone" as you state, and that it is more likely public servants who are the mum and dad investors, the balance being business people who declare peppercorn incomes;

2. that public servants are overpaid and over renumerated with benefits (salary sacrifice, excessive superannuation contributions, training subsidies, excessive PD courses, minor productive work hours, cars, etc).


----------



## Tisme (23 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Sure that's good for the investors, but not  the national interest because you then have generations of renters who won't be able to own their own homes and therefore will have to rely on social security.
> 
> Investors will still be able to sell their was new but now existing properties, but it will be to owner occupiers, and they probably won't get the inflated price they would have got if they sold to investors, but that's their tough luck as they reduced their tax liability anyway by negative gearing deductions.




Many of these "responsible" investors who are doing a public service in the absence of state housing expenditure, are actually tantamount to slum lords, easily seen by wandering through the negative gearing suburbs. While the owners are rewarding themselves by depreciating water heaters, meter boxes, tattered lino floors, and all other insundry that have probably passed their used by date a decade ago without any remedial works to justify depreciation in the first place, we are all paying extra tax to offset their cleverness and charity.

Then there's the rest of us who have to sit through parties and the like in ear shot of some idiot who thinks he's Donald Trump, hearing about all the properties that are really levered against the last property and still at call from the bank. I know myself, the get out costs of a negative geared portfolio can be rather angering..... which of course pleases me in relation to the blood suckers who take but never put back.


----------



## Tisme (23 February 2016)

Keating 2007:



> Mr Turnbull was a bit like a big red bunger on cracker night,
> 
> "You light him up, there's a bit of a fizz but then nothing, nothing."


----------



## Bob (23 February 2016)

Tisme said:


> Many of these "responsible" investors who are doing a public service in the absence of state housing expenditure, are actually tantamount to slum lords, easily seen by wandering through the negative gearing suburbs. While the owners are rewarding themselves by depreciating water heaters, meter boxes, tattered lino floors, and all other insundry that have probably passed their used by date a decade ago without any remedial works to justify depreciation in the first place, we are all paying extra tax to offset their cleverness and charity.
> 
> Then there's the rest of us who have to sit through parties and the like in ear shot of some idiot who thinks he's Donald Trump, hearing about all the properties that are really levered against the last property and still at call from the bank. I know myself, the get out costs of a negative geared portfolio can be rather angering..... which of course pleases me in relation to the blood suckers who take but never put back.




The 7 capital sins which have been aligned to countries
Greed   Mexico
Pride    Iceland
Gluttony  USA
Lust       S. Korea
Wrath    S. Africa
ENVY      Australia

Hey, don't do anything......sit around, drink, spend your money and go on welfare when you get older.  CENTERLINK - LIVING THE DREAM


----------



## Tisme (23 February 2016)

I'm watching question time and wondering why the govt is preoccupied with blaming Labor for what the govt is responsible for. Bishop in particular is being deliberately obstropolous while on our taxpayer's time..... those that actually pay tax instead of those that avoid it in negative gearing and other taxpayer subsidised schemes .... another way of garnering welfare by stealth.


----------



## drsmith (23 February 2016)

The conclusion I've reached on NG is that it should be part of a broader wage and salary deductions cap that reduces over time. If this cap was to start at say, $20k, with a reduction rate of $2k per year, it would be eliminated after 10 years. The scope for deductions within the cap should also be tightened. 

A simple reform for CGT would be to reduce the present discount from 50% to 40% (Ken Henry) and introduce CPI indexation as an option to the taxpayer. Presently, the 50% discount is detrimental relative to CPI indexation of the cost base when the nominal CG is less than twice the CPI indexation component. Under 40% discount or CPI indexation, CPI indexation would logically be chosen when the nominal CG is less than 2.5 times the CPI indexation component.

Both the above in my view reduce the need for grandfathering relative to Labor's options and have less risk of sudden market disruptions. The proceeds as they are raised (in particular from the NG change) could over time fuel tax cuts. The CGT discount could also be cut further over time to the extent that it's matched by cuts in marginal income tax rates.

Malcolm Turnbull talked about the CPI and real capital gain in QT today in his criticism of Labor's CGT policy. The same problem however is there with current policy all be it to a lesser extent. In commentary on Labor's proposal, "Increasing capital gains tax is not part of our thinking whatsoever." would suggest that this specific policy area is off the table which is unfortunate in my view.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 February 2016)

Bob said:


> The 7 capital sins which have been aligned to countries
> Greed   Mexico
> Pride    Iceland
> Gluttony  USA
> ...




Once you start talking about the politics of envy we know you have lost the argument.


----------



## DB008 (23 February 2016)

Tisme said:


> Should be front page news : "Six top Libs hold 99 negatively geared properties", you know the mum and dad investors.





Fixed That For You....




Tisme said:


> Should be front page news : "*Nick Xenophon* holds 99 negatively geared properties", you know the mum and dad investors.


----------



## MrBurns (23 February 2016)

Watching Tony Burke on 730 if the ALP put him in he would be a real threat, he's likeable and that's important.


----------



## Tisme (23 February 2016)

DB008 said:


> Fixed That For You....




I wonder if Bill has a few too?


----------



## SirRumpole (24 February 2016)

Tisme said:


> I wonder if Bill has a few too?




http://resources.news.com.au/files/2016/02/15/1227749/432485-160216property.pdf


----------



## SirRumpole (24 February 2016)

At last, the truth about negative gearing:

http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/negative-gearing-explained/7192920



			
				Saul Eslake said:
			
		

> it's hard to think of any single measure that a federal government could take that would do more to help first home buyers than what Labor is proposing


----------



## Knobby22 (24 February 2016)

Saul is right.
The early noises were that Turnbull wanted to do something similar but it appears he has been pulled into line now.
The under 35 vote will now be against him as this is really a war between the baby boomers and the young. Also some of the baby boomers will be for it as it will help their kids. 

The Libs are envisaging a big scare campaign to win the election but it could easily backfire. It appears to me Turnbull has some great ideas but is being stymied constantly. Hopefully some internal polling will circumvent the dumb right of the party.


----------



## Tisme (24 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> At last, the truth about negative gearing:
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/negative-gearing-explained/7192920




It's taxpayer funded welfare to those who can convince a bank to give them an interest only loan... socialism in disguise.

 As I recall it was originally introduced by Keating and Hawke  to stop landlords tax sheltering under rental properties. Must be one of those bad policies the Liberals probably arced up about back in the day, but now it's good policy because no one remembers its roots..... the ALP probably think they gave so they can take away.


----------



## Tisme (24 February 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Saul is right.
> 
> The Libs are envisaging a big scare campaign to win the election but it could easily backfire. It appears to me Turnbull has some great ideas but is being stymied constantly. Hopefully some internal polling will circumvent the dumb right of the party.




Yeah well they are sensible economic managers n'est-ce pas?



http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/5519.0.55.001


----------



## Bob (24 February 2016)

Negative gearing won’t be changed.

The reasons are both practical and political and also based around fairness, given that all negative gearing does is bring ordinary wage and salary earners into line with any business that can deduct its interest expense from its income before assessing tax.

On the practical side, the first point to be made is that in the Federal Budget context, negative gearing is really small beer.

While opponents like to paint it as a massive concession sapping the nation’s finances, the reality is a long way short of that.

Negative gearing opponent John Daley of the Grattan Institute has helpfully run his own numbers which showed that, in the decade to 2010-11, 1.2 million taxpayers recorded net losses of $13 billion on investment properties.


He estimates that stopping all new negative gearing claims ”” given that changing existing arrangements would involve retrospective legislation ”” would net the Federal Government a grand long-run total of $2 billion a year.

In the terms of a Federal Budget that received $360.3 billion and paid out $406.4 billion in 2013-14, that is little more than a rounding error.

Indeed, tax receipts for that year fell $3.3 billion short of Budget and payments by $4.2 billion, so $2 billion (if that was the number that eventuated) would fail to move the Budget needle in any discernible way.

That may not matter if getting rid of negative gearing produced some wildly positive social benefits, but at the least the numbers decry the often-heard claim that its abolition would instantly deliver balanced Budgets and economic nirvana.

A political reason why negative gearing rules won’t be changed is that for this barely discernible change in the Budget outcome, the potential pain is actually quite large and widespread.

Rather than being the exclusive preserve of silvertails, negative gearing has spread a long way through many different income levels.

About 15 per cent of all taxpayers now use negative gearing and many of them are from lower income levels.

While the bigger individual claims are obviously made by the truly wealthy with more money to lose, the majority of claimants are in the $37,000-to-$80,000-a-year salary bracket.

Next are those in the $80,000-to-$180,000-a-year bracket, followed by ”” surprisingly ”” those earning less than $20,000 a year.

While none of these current negative gearers would necessarily lose anything, creating two classes of voters ”” those who can claim negative gearing and those younger voters that no longer have that option ”” involves spending a lot of political capital for a barely measurable return.

Adding on to the political cost is the possibility that abolishing negative gearing might actually work slightly and/or coincide with housing prices falling from their peaks.

That alone has the potential to change the equation from about 15 per cent of the population being really angry with Prime Minister Tony Abbott to the vast majority, who could safely and with great venom blame the Government for trashing the value of their biggest investment.

With the added possibility that renters could be angry too as rents spiked and rental housing supply fell.

As Sir Humphrey Appleby would say, that would be a courageous political decision indeed ”” one that is not going to happen in Australia with its stellar home ownership rate of 67 per cent.

If those opponents of negative gearing really want to reduce the popularity of the strategy, perhaps they should commission some long-range results from actual users.

I suspect the average overall returns would fall a very long way short of the financial and emotional risks that have been taken.


----------



## moXJO (24 February 2016)

As usual labor is late to the party and turn up empty handed. If they are pining their hopes on negative gearing being their savior  they will be caught well short. It will probably do more damage then good. Chinese will still snap up well located properties. And it would be interesting to see if maintenance to investment properties continue or we get the "slum lord" effect.


This is much of the same from labor and their smoke and mirrors on policy. Sounds good,  but ends up being a disaster with labor scrambling to bandaid over the top. It's another "napkin thought bubble policy".

 I was l personally happy that politics had stopped being the front page circus it was.
Labor is still stuck in the Rudd Era. 
Malcom needs to be very careful to not get caught up in labors spin machine. Neither side of the media will give him any breaks.


----------



## Logique (24 February 2016)

It's comedy capers. Negative gearing changes will drive house prices down...no up...no down..



> Kelly O'Dwyer forced to clarify comments after contradicting Malcolm Turnbull on live TV - 24 Feb 2016
> SMH: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...on-live-tv-20160223-gn20mb.html#ixzz4131Hp5mP
> 
> ..On Seven's Sunrise program on Wednesday, Ms O'Dwyer said Labor's proposal to limit negative gearing to new properties was irresponsible and *would drive up house prices*.
> ...




I still like Labor's proposal. I think voter land does too.


----------



## bellenuit (24 February 2016)

As far as I understand the proposals and someone can correct me if I'm wrong, for those properties that will not be allowed to negative gear (e.g. established houses bought after the deadline), that portion of expenses that exceed rental income which can no longer be deducted that tax year, are added to the cost base of the property and will reduce capital gains when the property is sold.

So to a certain extent, the negative gearing proposals are bringing forward tax revenue on existing properties bought after the deadline from their year of eventual sale to preceding tax years. Since capital gains are taxed at only 50% of the gain, the net tax revenue increase over the life of the property in that investor's hands is not the total excess annual loss over income of the property (taxed at the investor's marginal tax rate), but 50% of that amount (assuming the investor is at the same marginal rate when the property is sold).


----------



## Tisme (24 February 2016)

Bob said:


> Negative gearing won’t be changed.
> 
> The reasons are both practical and political and also based around fairness, given that all negative gearing does is bring ordinary wage and salary earners into line with any business that can deduct its interest expense from its income before assessing tax.
> 
> ...




I think the average declared rental loss is $10,000 ? How many negatively geared houses out there?


----------



## drsmith (24 February 2016)

bellenuit said:


> As far as I understand the proposals and someone can correct me if I'm wrong, for those properties that will not be allowed to negative gear (e.g. established houses bought after the deadline), that portion of expenses that exceed rental income which can no longer be deducted that tax year, are added to the cost base of the property and will reduce capital gains when the property is sold.



There's only a basic outline of the specific policy on Labor's website that I could find and it's outlined as follows,



> Negative gearing
> 
> Labor will limit negative gearing to new housing from 1 July 2017. All investments made before this date will not be affected by this change and will be fully grandfathered.
> 
> ...



http://www.alp.org.au/negativegearing

My initial take on the final paragraph was that is was a reference to shares being outside the policy and grandfathering of existing properties but upon re-reading a number of times, I'm not so sure.

More clarification is needed in relation to the capital gain reference and also on how a loss offsets a liability. 

For reference, the ATO states an overall income loss can be treated as follows,



> If you make a tax loss in an income year you can carry it forward and deduct it in future years against income for tax purposes. Certain deductions cannot be used to contribute to a loss. A tax loss is different from a capital loss.




https://www.ato.gov.au/General/Losses/


----------



## banco (24 February 2016)

I would have thought it's common sense that-all other things being equal-house prices would fall under Labor's policy. You have an investment that had certain tax advantages once you take away those tax advantages it should be a less attractive investment.


----------



## drsmith (25 February 2016)

On tax reform, the government needs to be more ambitious that that outlined in the following,



> The Turnbull government is preparing to abandon serious tax reform.
> 
> It has ruled out major change in favour of a pair of savings measures seen as politically safe: curbing the excessive use of negative gearing by wealthy investors, and reducing extensive parking of pre-tax income in superannuation accounts.
> 
> ...




http://www.standard.net.au/story/37...nly-caps-on-super-negative-gearing-left/?cs=7

The $50k threshold for the negative gearing limit in particular looks weak.


----------



## Knobby22 (25 February 2016)

drsmith said:


> http://www.standard.net.au/story/37...nly-caps-on-super-negative-gearing-left/?cs=7
> 
> The $50k threshold for the negative gearing limit in particular looks weak.




I thought we were going to get some decent reform. Damn.


----------



## qldfrog (25 February 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> I thought we were going to get some decent reform. Damn.




Add  the fact we might actually end up buying these bloody useless subs for up to 150 billions just a figure ehhhh, if these reports end up true, Malcolm will lose me (and i am a fan as opposed to what is available on the shelf:  dimwit TA  or worse , oe Shorten and his band of crooks as alternative)
God save Australia...


----------



## drsmith (25 February 2016)

On school and hospital funding, it looks like the government is examining options for a $7m increase in funding trajectory over the forward estimates 



> Officials at all levels of government are working through a series of complex options aimed at finding about $7 billion for healthcare and so-called Gonski education funding that was cut from state budgets in the 2014 budget.




http://www.afr.com/news/economy/turnbull-moves-to-defuse-state-funding-election-bomb-20160224-gn2gky



> It is understood the interim funding could amount to around $7bn over the forward estimates and the assurances are the reason the states have not been publicly rebutting Morrison’s statements that they could somehow pay for the funding shortfall themselves.




http://www.theguardian.com/australi...-hospital-funding-in-budget-after-abbott-cuts


----------



## drsmith (25 February 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> I thought we were going to get some decent reform. Damn.



I did see another recent suggestion of a NG/deductions cap of $20k and increasing the threshold for the 37% (39% after Medicare) threshold from $80k to $100k. 

Still not enough overall but better than the above.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (25 February 2016)

Today:  A White Paper describing hundreds of billions$ of new spending on defense.

And on the other hand, a government doing everything it can to build the population through immigration.  Well, they've all been the same.

The question has to be asked:  *Against whom are we defending ourselves... and why?*  If it's the Chinese, then they have already bought up huge tracts of farmland, commercial and residential real estate... even a strategic port in the north!  There's no need for defense, because it can be bypassed with money.  

It's like we have this very wealthy 'friend' that we can use to further our own position, yet we don't trust him.  Is a friend someone you use?  No. Why use anyone like that?  Such a mad situation.  The friend is cloaked in secrecy, never shows his hand, never shows emotion... and occasionally hacks into your largest corporations and grabs land in disputed waters.  I'd rather be without such a 'friend'.

Keep good company.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 February 2016)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Today:  A White Paper describing hundreds of billions$ of new spending on defense.
> 
> And on the other hand, a government doing everything it can to build the population through immigration.  Well, they've all been the same.
> 
> ...




Indonesia may turn out to be a bigger threat. There are a lot of radical Muslims there and if one of them becomes President or they take over the Parliament, then that could be bad news for us.

Personally I would build an underground nuclear reactor and produce nuclear weapons. That may be a more credible deterrent than that White Paper stuff.


----------



## bellenuit (25 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Indonesia may turn out to be a bigger threat. There are a lot of radical Muslims there and if one of them becomes President or they take over the Parliament, then that could be bad news for us.
> 
> Personally I would build an underground nuclear reactor and produce nuclear weapons. That may be a more credible deterrent than that White Paper stuff.




I've often thought that a potential scenario is that a group of Indonesian Islamic radicals or perhaps a disgruntled breakaway army general with ambitions of power take control of some of our offshore oil rigs and claim that they are in Indonesian territorial waters. This would be to provoke a reaction from Australia. No reaction could mean we lose control of the oil rigs. Military action could mean a major incident that might then backfire on us and feed support to the activists. It is fairly clear that there is little liking for Australia among Indonesians, so the outcome could be that even a sensible government in power there may be forced to side with popular opinion.


----------



## banco (25 February 2016)

qldfrog said:


> Add  the fact we might actually end up buying these bloody useless subs for up to 150 billions just a figure ehhhh, if these reports end up true, Malcolm will lose me (and i am a fan as opposed to what is available on the shelf:  dimwit TA  or worse , oe Shorten and his band of crooks as alternative)
> God save Australia...




If they purchased them off the shelf I wouldn't have a problem with it. Instead the navy will goldplate them and they'll have to built as much as possible in SA which will mean they'll cost a fortune.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 February 2016)

bellenuit said:


> I've often thought that a potential scenario is that a group of Indonesian Islamic radicals or perhaps a disgruntled breakaway army general with ambitions of power take control of some of our offshore oil rigs and claim that they are in Indonesian territorial waters. This would be to provoke a reaction from Australia. No reaction could mean we lose control of the oil rigs. Military action could mean a major incident that might then backfire on us and feed support to the activists. It is fairly clear that there is little liking for Australia among Indonesians, so the outcome could be that even a sensible government in power there may be forced to side with popular opinion.




There are lots of scenarios like that that could lead to military conflict.

People who don't like us already don't need much to be offended, or pretend to be and therefore escalate their dislike to potentially military action. If they have the means to carry off military action, I think it's probably inevitable that it will happen.


----------



## explod (25 February 2016)

banco said:


> If they purchased them off the shelf I wouldn't have a problem with it. Instead the navy will goldplate them and they'll have to built as much as possible in SA which will mean they'll cost a fortune.




Interesting view.   It is well established that Australian shipbuiding expertise is second to none.  Second you only get as good as you pay for.   Third money spent in Australia stays in the Australian ecomomy which equals no loss at all.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 February 2016)

explod said:


> Interesting view.   It is well established that Australian shipbuiding expertise is second to none.  Second you only get as good as you pay for.   Third money spent in Australia stays in the Australian ecomomy which equals no loss at all.




Not to mention the fact that we don't want others knowing all the secrets of our equipment. 

I think the hulls will probably be built elsewhere and we will supply the command and control and weapons control systems and any other "smart" stuff that we don't want to be widely known.


----------



## qldfrog (25 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Not to mention the fact that we don't want others knowing all the secrets of our equipment.
> 
> I think the hulls will probably be built elsewhere and we will supply the command and control and weapons control systems and any other "smart" stuff that we don't want to be widely known.



Do you realise how much you can buy for 50 billions..(the initial to be inflated price, the number of moder drone and self guided missiles you can build;
I understand spending some money on defence, but what is next: gold plated bow and arrows. unless you have a nuclear head onboard, a submarine is just useless crap;and we can do better with 50billions including ensuring we are a threat to any attacker


----------



## SirRumpole (25 February 2016)

qldfrog said:


> and we can do better with 50billions including ensuring we are a threat to any attacker




What would you suggest ?


----------



## banco (25 February 2016)

explod said:


> Interesting view.   It is well established that Australian shipbuiding expertise is second to none.  Second you only get as good as you pay for.   Third money spent in Australia stays in the Australian ecomomy which equals no loss at all.




Yes Australia is a real shipbuilding powerhouse. The ADF's history of not buying off the shelf is that instead of buying equipment that will do 90% of what the ADF want we end up spending millions more for untested, unreliable stuff.But boys want their toys.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (25 February 2016)

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/...ow-about-new-chinese-wealth-flowing-australia


----------



## moXJO (26 February 2016)

banco said:


> Yes Australia is a real shipbuilding powerhouse. The ADF's history of not buying off the shelf is that instead of buying equipment that will do 90% of what the ADF want we end up spending millions more for untested, unreliable stuff.But boys want their toys.




Agree.
Our Collins class subs were an expensive lesson in what not to do. Billions more get wasted in building it ourselves. Between govt departments money grabbing and union delays,  by the time it is delivered (riddled with problems) it's about as effective as a bondi log.


----------



## Tisme (26 February 2016)

moXJO said:


> Agree.
> Our Collins class subs were an expensive lesson in what not to do. Billions more get wasted in building it ourselves. Between govt departments money grabbing and union delays,  by the time it is delivered (riddled with problems) it's about as effective as a bondi log.




I wonder how the project gets past the preoccupation of the govt to legislate out every risk to safety in the home, in the workplace, in the products, etc there is; we might end up with a weaponless canoe which cannot be used in water deeper than six inches in conjunction with safety vests and a SWMS. 

I can understand the govt wanting them built offshore to avoid the endless PCG meetings headed by a woman named "Di" and a group made up of rat cunning first gen Orientals and buffoon English Occidentals. None of them need to know anything about making a boat, just that the minutes of the meeting are well crafted and the correct version of Excel spreadsheet is being employed. The outside consultants who also know nothing about boats can handle the drudgery of documenting the project so that the $65/hr people at the coal face can become enraged at the clear lack of understanding by the $250/hr services engineers.


----------



## Logique (26 February 2016)

Go early, Turnbull government, to a July election, on a Double D.

Make my day.


----------



## explod (26 February 2016)

Logique said:


> Go early, Turnbull government, to a July election, on a Double D.
> 
> Make my day.




Why will it make your day?


----------



## SirRumpole (26 February 2016)

Logique said:


> Go early, Turnbull government, to a July election, on a Double D.
> 
> Make my day.




A couple of months won't make much difference.


----------



## basilio (26 February 2016)

I am really disappointed and surprised at how quickly Malcolm Turnball has fallen as PM. 

He come in as intelligent, liberal in the true sense of the word and open to rational  evidence based policy debate. Five months later and he appears to be a hollow shell dominated by arch conservatives and vested interests. 

Shame for everyone.


----------



## MrBurns (26 February 2016)

basilio said:


> I am really disappointed and surprised at how quickly Malcolm Turnball has fallen as PM.
> 
> He come in as intelligent, liberal in the true sense of the word and open to rational  evidence based policy debate. Five months later and he appears to be a hollow shell dominated by arch conservatives and vested interests.
> 
> Shame for everyone.




I'm afraid you're right
He should get the supercilious grin off his face for starters he appears to be enjoying the position while not doing anything much beyond making grand statements.


----------



## qldfrog (26 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What would you suggest ?



missiles on a railway network and a proper radar cover, would provide a railway network to the nation as a side effect, and a radar cover for civilian plane;
submarines are only kind of pretending to be useful in a classic war againsty a state, useless in an IS or terrorist attack;at least get a few existing models for half the price and ensure you can pay someone to serve them.a poor country is not a powerfull one


----------



## SirRumpole (26 February 2016)

qldfrog said:


> missiles on a railway network and a proper radar cover, would provide a railway network to the nation as a side effect, and a radar cover for civilian plane;
> submarines are only kind of pretending to be useful in a classic war againsty a state, useless in an IS or terrorist attack;at least get a few existing models for half the price and ensure you can pay someone to serve them.a poor country is not a powerfull one




Maybe the most effective defence system is the ability to hack into the enemies weapons control systems and change the target of their missiles to the enemies own assets, or initiate a self destruct sequence.

The first country that can do that will gain a massive advantage. Occasionally blow up a few missile silos and sit around and laugh while the enemy figures out how it happened.

It would be billions cheaper than buying all this hardware.


----------



## qldfrog (26 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Maybe the most effective defence system is the ability to hack into the enemies weapons control systems and change the target of their missiles to the enemies own assets, or initiate a self destruct sequence.
> 
> The first country that can do that will gain a massive advantage. Occasionally blow up a few missile silos and sit around and laugh while the enemy figures out how it happened.
> 
> It would be billions cheaper than buying all this hardware.



True and making sure your balistic missiles can avoid counter defences but that would not help in building a decent railway network


----------



## basilio (27 February 2016)

Cyber warfare is the way to go. Whether it's  sabotaging military infrastructure, destroying national assets, or misleading people with false information it would take very little effort to destroy a modern country that is based on computer technology.

I think for example that one of the concerns about North Korea having ICBM capacities is not a nuclear bomb dropping on America but a nuclear air blast that would destroy all electronics and computers over thousands of sq kilometres

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/170563-north-korea-emp


----------



## Logique (27 February 2016)

explod said:


> Why will it make your day?



So coy Explod!  

Basking as he has, in the warm glow of his Fairfax press and ABC admirers - none of whom will vote for his government, it (a July election) would be a healthy reality check for the PM.

But the Greens and Xylophone (with his slew of negatively geared properties, well, four actually) will get the balance in the Senate. So kick the can down the road on the spending problem, Keynesianism their choice.


----------



## MrBurns (27 February 2016)

I wouldn't vote ALP in a pink fit but I'm getting sick of Malcolm standing in front of his $50m mansion telling us the ALP want to lower house prices .......as if that would be a bad thing, and Julie Bishop is annoying me also, she must spend half the day getting her teeth whitened and the rest trying to look like a film star, she always has that grin on her face as if she's never worked a day in her life.

I'll have to vote for Bill if it means the capital gains tax will be changed.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 February 2016)

MrBurns said:


> I wouldn't vote ALP in a pink fit but I'm getting sick of Malcolm standing in front of his $50m mansion telling us the ALP want to lower house prices .......as if that would be a bad thing, and Julie Bishop is annoying me also, she must spend half the day getting her teeth whitened and the rest trying to look like a film star, she always has that grin on her face as if she's never worked a day in her life.
> 
> I'll have to vote for Bill if it means the capital gains tax will be changed.




I probably wouldn't vote for this bunch of Tories in a pink fit, but I'm very disappointed with Turnbull who I thought MIGHT bring about some decent reform in the financial section including NG and super, but who is quite obviously sticking by his mates and his own vested interests by way of maintaining the NG tax rort.

He's basically talked himself out of making any changes to this very expensive and pointless get richer scheme for the already rich and is a now a captive of the Right Wing of his Party.

Any thoughts that I would have entertained of voting for him have well and truly disappeared over the horizon.


----------



## Tisme (27 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> , but I'm very disappointed with Turnbull who I thought MIGHT bring about some decent reform in the financial section including NG and super, but .





You can't say I didn't warn you as far back as QANDA. He's a Chauncey Gardiner, always has been.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 February 2016)

Tisme said:


> You can't say I didn't warn you as far back as QANDA. He's a Chauncey Gardiner, always has been.




My memories of QANDA message board have faded somewhat (ah those were the days) but I'm sure you are right in your warnings.

Actually I think he is a clever bloke, just in the wrong party and he will always be a captive of the Right as long as the Liberal Rudd Abbott is still stalking around the backbenches.


----------



## qldfrog (28 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Actually I think he is a clever bloke, just in the wrong party and he will always be a captive of the Right as long as the Liberal Rudd Abbott is still stalking around the backbenches.



Probably ..disappointed as well, was hoping for a few meaningful in depth reform, etc...you know, someone acting for the good of Australia and with a vision.rudd tricked me, well Malcolm my be the last one to have done it.Still can not vote for many of the morons around the Liberals,Not that i will ever vote for Bill.


----------



## wayneL (28 February 2016)

qldfrog said:


> Probably ..disappointed as well, was hoping for a few meaningful in depth reform, etc...you know, someone acting for the good of Australia and with a vision.rudd tricked me, well Malcolm my be the last one to have done it.Still can not vote for many of the morons around the Liberals,Not that i will ever vote for Bill.




Yeah next few years is going to be a schmozzle and no good can come out of it. I hate it that I have to vote for some mob of morons just because it isn't headed by Bill.

Where does one go otherwise?


----------



## SirRumpole (28 February 2016)

wayneL said:


> Yeah next few years is going to be a schmozzle and no good can come out of it. I hate it that I have to vote for some mob of morons just because it isn't headed by Bill.




So what's wrong with Bill ?

He's leading a Party that's coming up with some decent policy.

As opposed to the Muppets currently in government.


----------



## noco (28 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> My memories of QANDA message board have faded somewhat (ah those were the days) but I'm sure you are right in your warnings.
> 
> Actually I think he is a clever bloke, just in the wrong party and he will always be a captive of the Right as long as the Liberal Rudd Abbott is still stalking around the backbenches.




Rumpy, I have never been more disillusioned with both sides of politics in my whole life.......I am totally pi$$ed off with the negativity in our governments over the past decade........The National interest has been lost from both sides which I blame on the media who seem content in controlling what ever takes place in Canberra or the states....The modern politicians these days are afraid to make drastic decisions in fear of how the media report it and how it will affect them at the polls.....Every body wants to take but not give back in the interest of this great nation......If any decision are made which affects the hip pocket there will always be a hue and cry about it....Sacrifice is a thing of the past.

So on that point I have decided to join the Rechabites and move to Dubai where there is no GST and you don't pay any tax...What you earn you keep.

Do you want to come with me?


----------



## SirRumpole (28 February 2016)

noco said:


> Rumpy, I have never been more disillusioned with both sides of politics in my whole life.......I am totally pi$$ed off with the negativity in our governments over the past decade........The National interest has been lost from both sides which I blame on the media who seem content in controlling what ever takes place in Canberra or the states....The modern politicians these days are afraid to make drastic decisions in fear of how the media report it and how it will affect them at the polls.....Every body wants to take but not give back in the interest of this great nation......If any decision are made which affects the hip pocket there will always be a hue and cry about it....Sacrifice is a thing of the past.
> 
> So on that point I have decided to join the Rechabites and move to Dubai where there is no GST and you don't pay any tax...What you earn you keep.
> 
> Do you want to come with me?




Dubai ? A lot of sand , but no beaches.

Switzerland sounds better to me.

The hills are alive......


----------



## wayneL (28 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> So what's wrong with Bill ?
> 
> He's leading a Party that's coming up with some decent policy.
> 
> As opposed to the Muppets currently in government.




NG has some merit, at least for discussion... Haven't heard anything else worthy of a pinch of goat shyte.

Can you enlighten me?


----------



## wayneL (28 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Dubai ? A lot of sand , but no beaches.
> 
> Switzerland sounds better to me.
> 
> The hills are alive......



I'll be in that.... Work galore for me and missus too.


----------



## Logique (28 February 2016)

Just by the by. Thank goodness our PM isn't one of these.



> *The Narcissistic Sociopath*
> http://www.disabled-world.com/disability/types/psychological/sociopaths.php
> 
> ...such a situation is highly dangerous because these people do not want to be helped.
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (28 February 2016)

Logique said:


> Just by the by. Thank goodness our PM isn't one of these.




I don't think Turnbull is one of those although he may be about 80-90%.

The Donald though is right there at the top.


----------



## moXJO (28 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> So what's wrong with Bill ?
> 
> He's leading a Party that's coming up with some decent policy.
> 
> As opposed to the Muppets currently in government.




Umm 
No their not..... They just throw around half baked ideas. And there's a lot wrong with bill and the labor party.

We need full tax reform, but both sides are too pigeon  $hit to pull the trigger. Both parties are too worried about losing their marginal seats.
Pack of money wasting diptards the lot of them.


----------



## banco (28 February 2016)

According to the AFR the business council of australia's brilliant proposal to Turnbull was to bump up the GST to 15% and then use the savings to cut the company tax rate. Turnbull apparently said the Government might as well just commit suicide if it was going to do that.


----------



## luutzu (29 February 2016)

banco said:


> According to the AFR the business council of australia's brilliant proposal to Turnbull was to bump up the GST to 15% and then use the savings to cut the company tax rate. Turnbull apparently said the Government might as well just commit suicide if it was going to do that.




He said that? Wow, he want to commit his own political career suicide?

First he tell the Yanks we won't be sending anymore jets over Syria; then that mmms and rrrs about more ship to mock the Chinese... now taking on the real big guys?

I might come to like this Turnbull PM. But haven't been following. Though the white hair in a couple of months is a good sign he's working at least.


----------



## qldfrog (29 February 2016)

banco said:


> According to the AFR the business council of australia's brilliant proposal to Turnbull was to bump up the GST to 15% and then use the savings to cut the company tax rate. Turnbull apparently said the Government might as well just commit suicide if it was going to do that.



Would be for it and ensuring the reduced tax rate is actually paid-> clear the current tax legislation to the bone, treat any sale to O/S branch as tax evasion unless proven otherwise.That will catch the glencore, but also BHP etc and the apple/virtual goods sellers.
And reduce government expenses; submarines, NDIS, pensions to include all assets inc PPOR (most probably using a reverse morgage to the ATO), NG, etc etc
it is not that the solutions are hard to find , to design or implement; it is a case of political balls, and a wimp spoiled electorate and lobby groups which are so selfish they do  not even give a dam about their own kids future.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 February 2016)

Another disgraceful Question Time

Question to Scott Morrison: "What are the excesses in negative gearing?" [an issue Morrison himself brought up].

Answer : " Labor's policy blah blah blah..." Not once did he address the question and people actually want to know what he thinks are excesses and how he will cut them back. 

After some time in the job it's obvious that Morrison is all bluster and no substance, just like Hockey.


----------



## drsmith (29 February 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Another disgraceful Question Time.



When you've watched enough of them, you'll realise QT is more about theatre than about anything else. It's standard practice for the government of the day to resist releasing policy detail in parliament prior to public announcement and the opposition are not expecting an answer in any case.

The sting is intended to be in the question itself. In this case, it's a reference to government backbench unrest over changes the government is considering to cap negative gearing.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 February 2016)

drsmith said:


> When you've watched enough of them, you'll realise QT is more about theatre than about anything else. It's standard practice for the government of the day to resist releasing policy detail in parliament prior to public announcement and the opposition are not expecting an answer in any case.
> 
> The sting is intended to be in the question itself. In this case, it's a reference to government backbench unrest over changes the government is considering to cap negative gearing.




Yep, you are right Doc, theatre it is with some of the worst actors ever.

Barnaby Joyce should be in line for a Racso, blithering on like an idiot.


----------



## banco (29 February 2016)

drsmith said:


> When you've watched enough of them, you'll realise QT is more about theatre than about anything else. It's standard practice for the government of the day to resist releasing policy detail in parliament prior to public announcement and the opposition are not expecting an answer in any case.
> 
> The sting is intended to be in the question itself. In this case, it's a reference to government backbench unrest over changes the government is considering to cap negative gearing.




.....always ready with some spin. If it was Gillard you'd be saying what an outrage it was that she didn't answer the question.


----------



## drsmith (29 February 2016)

banco said:


> .....always ready with some spin.



That's not spin, it's the truth and something an astute political observer would understand.


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

I'm guessing Malcolm has a better appreciation of how Gillard felt when he and his smug cohorts pelted her relentlessly about Rudd undermining her. On the flip side I have no doubt Abbott draws no comparison whatsever to him being likened to Kevin Rudd.

I'm fairly sure Parliament house is haunted by body snatchers, being the political ghosts of Hawke and Keating.


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

banco said:


> .....always ready with some spin. If it was Gillard you'd be saying what an outrage it was that she didn't answer the question.




Correctly identifying tribal obsequiousness attempting to trivialise seriousness, there banco.

If question time is spin, it is a potentially career lethal activity ...as seen by Shorten successfully landing a jaw breaker on Turnbull's negative gearing intentions and Abbott consequently jumping in to the ring to land a sucker punch on the pretender.


----------



## noco (3 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> Correctly identifying tribal obsequiousness attempting to trivialise seriousness, there banco.
> 
> If question time is spin, it is a potentially career lethal activity ...as seen by Shorten successfully landing a jaw breaker on Turnbull's negative gearing intentions and Abbott consequently jumping in to the ring to land a sucker punch on the pretender.




And this negative gearing stunt by Shorten has backfired.


https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/morrison-seizes-negative-gearing-report-202517841.html

*Treasurer Scott Morrison has seized on a report which says Labor's proposed changes to negative gearing would result in rising rent prices.

Forecaster BIS Shrapnel estimates the policy would increase rents - possibly by as much as 10 per cent - with fewer properties being built meaning less employment.

Mr Morrison told ABC radio on Thursday the findings are a "damning indictment on Labor's policy".

"It's bad news if you own a home, it's bad news if you're an investor in a home, and bad news if you're renting a home," Mr Morrison said.

"That's three strikes and you're out."

Mr Morrison played down the fact the modelling had been commissioned by an unknown client, saying BIS Shrapnel was a reputable firm.*


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

noco said:


> And this negative gearing stunt by Shorten has backfired.




How so Noco?  What part of Turnbull changing his intentions is a stunt?


----------



## noco (3 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> How so Noco?  What part of Turnbull changing his intentions is a stunt?




Here is a little more for you to digest.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...t/news-story/71b662e838fe0e0588a452aae729d40f

*Bombshell economic modelling shows Bill Shorten’s negative gearing crackdown could lead to lower house prices, rent rises of up to 10 per cent, cost the budget more than it saves and cause *unemployment to rise.

The modelling, released today by economic forecaster BIS Shrapnel, predicts Labor’s plan to limit negative gearing to new homes from July next year will leave renters, low-income households and young people worse off and could cut gross domestic product by as much as 1 per cent, or $19 billion a year.

It predicts a decade of disruption in the housing market, *tighter supply for rental premises and a string of unintended consequences. These include 175,000 fewer jobs created over a decade, lower council rates receipts and lower stamp duties for state governments.

The release of the dire findings will spark a political firefight in parliament and put the oppos*ition under pressure to allay fears about the economic impacts of its policy.*


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

noco said:


> Here is a little more for you to digest.




Once again it's propaganda that you copy and paste Noco. What part of  the Turnbull govt wanting to get rid of it until Shorten owned the idea don't you understand? The weasel words Turnbull used in question time resulted in a censure motion for goodness sakes ... a serious action against someone accused of misleading parliament i.e. you and me (although loyalists would seek to trivialise question time to avoid the gravity of the supposed lies).

You can continue to reference News Corp and it's slave employees, but no one takes their bile as serious anymore. The brand is in its death throse, terminal from the abuse of trust in good fair handed journalism.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2016)

Fact check: Did abolishing negative gearing push up rents?

Doesn't stack up.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-06/hockey-negative-gearing/6431100


----------



## Mofra (3 March 2016)

Whoopsies - ScoMo made another booboo

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/fed...contained-crucial-errors-20160302-gn93kj.html

Treasurer Scott Morrison is under fire for using a controversial report to skewer Labor's negative gearing policy, after the report's authors clarified it was prepared before Labor's policy was announced and contained a crucial error.

The research, conducted by property forecaster BIS Shrapnel, predicted that abolishing negative gearing on established dwellings would wipe $19 billion from Australia's gross domestic product and push up rental prices by 10 per cent.


----------



## luutzu (3 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Fact check: Did abolishing negative gearing push up rents?
> 
> Doesn't stack up.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-06/hockey-negative-gearing/6431100





It's always the case that if the landlords and the Haves have more, the Have-Nots benefit. Simple economics 

It's like if you give me money, you're doing well and I will just have to make do with less. Like how a rise in insurance premium is, according to our Health Minister, good for the consumers.


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

I don't understand why the Liberal party just don't can it as an evil perpetrated by the Hawke/Keating govt..... why are they defending it?


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2016)

luutzu said:


> It's always the case that if the landlords and the Haves have more, the Have-Nots benefit. Simple economics
> 
> It's like if you give me money, you're doing well and I will just have to make do with less. Like how a rise in insurance premium is, according to our Health Minister, good for the consumers.




Liberal governorship always results in higher latent and overt taxation, loss of assets, less freedoms, higher war footing, etc. It's one of the biggest cons we all choose to ignore in case we have to use our noodles.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> I don't understand why the Liberal party just don't can it as an evil perpetrated by the Hawke/Keating govt..... why are they defending it?




Snouts in the trough.


----------



## moXJO (4 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Fact check: Did abolishing negative gearing push up rents?
> 
> Doesn't stack up.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-06/hockey-negative-gearing/6431100




Yeah a bit of a bs claim by ABC.  People were complaining about rent increases.
Here's how it will most likely work.

Sydney prices and property in well located areas remain the same- with rent increases.

The "have nots" in the poorer areas lose value on their homes.

The have nots employed in peripheral industries  (maintenance, cleaning, lawn mowing) lose work.

Spending stagnates as a trickle up effect takes over.

A good idea to fiddle with when Rudd came to power. But probably not a good idea to stick a fork in something at this stage of the economy.


----------



## Tisme (4 March 2016)

moXJO said:


> Yeah a bit of a bs claim by ABC.  People were complaining about rent increases.
> Here's how it will most likely work.
> 
> Sydney prices and property in well located areas remain the same- with rent increases.
> ...




I doubt there would be much change, especially given the grandfather clause. Negative gearers don't tend to pay much for actual maintenance, even though they may claim it.....in reality it's pretty much a nod's as good as a wink tax lie haven. Apartment blocks will continue with caretakers and managers anyway, if only for lower insurance premiums and risk aversion.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 March 2016)

moXJO said:


> A good idea to fiddle with when Rudd came to power. But probably not a good idea to stick a fork in something at this stage of the economy.




The fact is that a lot of potential owner occupiers have withdrawn from the market because they know they will be gazumped by the investors.

Prices may fall initially but unless you need to sell right now waiting until the owner occupiers realise that houses are now affordable and come back in to the market increased demand will result in prices rising again but at a lower rate.

Which suits everyone I reckon.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 March 2016)

Turnbull could meet Labor half way on negative gearing


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-...et-labor-half-way-on-negative-gearing/7219394


----------



## Junior (4 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Turnbull could meet Labor half way on negative gearing
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-...et-labor-half-way-on-negative-gearing/7219394






> And I know that always means that someone can then run a scare campaign, but I'm sorry, we've got to stop (this). This is part of the political tradition I'm determined to end. We have got to be able to consider policy options in an unfettered way. We've got to have the maturity to have a debate that is not throwing things off the table ... Because what happens is politicians who get intimidated by their opponents or by the media or whatever, they say, "Oh that's off the table, that's off the table, that's off the table" and suddenly there's nothing left on the table.




How quickly the above has become meaningless.  Very, very disappointed in Turnbull....I'll reserve some judgement for budget night, but very disappointing performance thus far.


----------



## wayneL (4 March 2016)

Junior said:


> How quickly the above has become meaningless.  Very, very disappointed in Turnbull....I'll reserve some judgement for budget night, but very disappointing performance thus far.




I think I'm going to join Whoopi and Rosanne and move to Canada.

Especially so, considering the alternative to Turnbull.


----------



## drsmith (4 March 2016)

It's been a messy parliamentary fortnight for the government, on more than one front.

It was a mistake for Malcolm Turnbull to go after Labor's NG policy early last week without either a coherent policy position or policy path from the government. It reminded a bit of then he jumped in too quick on what was ultimately that Godwin Grech email.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 March 2016)

Another White Elephant


http://www.abc.net.au/radionational...pine-over-joint-strike-fighter-expert/7218478
--


----------



## luutzu (4 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Another White Elephant
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/radionational...pine-over-joint-strike-fighter-expert/7218478
> --




And the next one will be $150Billion? Times that by two to get close to the eventual figure and wow.

As a US senator once said, a billion here a billion there adds up to real money.


----------



## Logique (4 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The fact is that a lot of potential owner occupiers have withdrawn from the market because they know they will be gazumped by the investors.
> 
> Prices may fall initially but unless you need to sell right now waiting until the owner occupiers realise that houses are now affordable and come back in to the market increased demand will result in prices rising again but at a lower rate.
> Which suits everyone I reckon.



Agree. Some houses will shift to owner-occupiers, as they should, and prices will begin to rise again.

Amazing to see the Coalition pollies suddenly find their social consciences, once they realized slashed negative gearing would be a progressive tax change affecting them.  

Hitherto, they had been smug in the knowledge that they'd get a tax cut,  paid for by the regressive proposed 15% GST.  I don't remember any crocodile tears of social angst for the self-funded retirees, or kids in their first jobs, or young couples trying to buy their first home.

Stay the course Labor.


----------



## Tisme (5 March 2016)

Economic managers :

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-01/australia's-net-foreign-debt-tips-over-$1-trillion/7210622


----------



## SirRumpole (5 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> Economic managers :
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-01/australia's-net-foreign-debt-tips-over-$1-trillion/7210622




I suppose we can't blame them for the crash in commodity prices but they will be hanging all their hopes on the Budget I'd say. 

Trouble is (or maybe the good thing is) that they can't do anything vicious to the ordinary person in an election year.


----------



## moXJO (6 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I suppose we can't blame them for the crash in commodity prices but they will be hanging all their hopes on the Budget I'd say.
> 
> Trouble is (or maybe the good thing is) that they can't do anything vicious to the ordinary person in an election year.




Are you guys confusing "net foreign debt" with "national debt? 
The libs have recognized and been pushing stronger trade links for a while now. This is one area they have been opening up for Australian companies.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 March 2016)

moXJO said:


> Are you guys confusing "net foreign debt" with "national debt?
> The libs have recognized and been pushing stronger trade links for a while now. This is one area they have been opening up for Australian companies.




In my view any advantages that will accrue to Australian exporters will be cancelled by the flood of imports that will now be allowed under Free Trade rules.

Prepare for a massive deterioration in our terms of trade and more reliance on foreign products , leading to a further decline in our capability to satisfy our own requirements.


----------



## noco (6 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> In my view any advantages that will accrue to Australian exporters will be cancelled by the flood of imports that will now be allowed under Free Trade rules.
> 
> Prepare for a massive deterioration in our terms of trade and more reliance on foreign products , leading to a further decline in our capability to satisfy our own requirements.




Cost of living will be lower and inflation kept under control........Innovation will save us ......I don't think BS can.


----------



## moXJO (7 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> In my view any advantages that will accrue to Australian exporters will be cancelled by the flood of imports that will now be allowed under Free Trade rules.
> 
> Prepare for a massive deterioration in our terms of trade and more reliance on foreign products , leading to a further decline in our capability to satisfy our own requirements.




Australian produce is seen as premium to other countries. We open up to hundreds of millions in potential customers. They open to a fussy Australian market.
Pretty sure our business here isn't crying unless it's the ones ripping us off.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 March 2016)

moXJO said:


> Australian produce is seen as premium to other countries. We open up to hundreds of millions in potential customers.




Customers that are also being targetted by much larger economies than us.


----------



## moXJO (7 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Customers that are also being targetted by much larger economies than us.




You might not be familiar with the industry but australia targets markets very well.
 So long as the govt doesn't blunder it's way into political messes (labors knee jerks that destroyed a few industries).

Trade is important and the liberals are on the right track in that regard.


----------



## Tisme (7 March 2016)

moXJO said:


> You might not be familiar with the industry but australia targets markets very well.
> So long as the govt doesn't blunder it's way into political messes (labors knee jerks that destroyed a few industries).
> 
> Trade is important and the liberals are on the right track in that regard.




I think we all need to mature up and start thinking the Australian Govt be responsible to us, not to a political persuasion. The constant tiffs about who did what is an insult to our collective IMO:


for example why the spoils go to the victor instead of acknowledging the positives that went before to reach the positive outcome .... instead of spraying poison on the past.





> News Weekly, May 2, 2009
> Kevin Rudd is continuing to push for a free trade agreement with China, despite evidence that earlier such agreements have damaged Australia's economy by worsening the country's trade deficit. Peter Westmore reports.
> 
> The Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is continuing to push for a free trade agreement with China, despite evidence that earlier such agreements have damaged Australia's economy by worsening the country's trade deficit.
> ...





http://newsweekly.com.au/article.php?id=3943


----------



## SirRumpole (7 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> I think we all need to mature up and start thinking the Australian Govt be responsible to us, not to a political persuasion. The constant tiffs about who did what is an insult to our collective IMO:
> 
> 
> for example why the spoils go to the victor instead of acknowledging the positives that went before to reach the positive outcome .... instead of spraying poison on the past.
> ...





Gee that's disappointing, I thought the FTA was totally due to "Robb the Magnificent".


----------



## moXJO (7 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> I think we all need to mature up and start thinking the Australian Govt be responsible to us, not to a political persuasion. The constant tiffs about who did what is an insult to our collective IMO:
> 
> 
> for example why the spoils go to the victor instead of acknowledging the positives that went before to reach the positive outcome .... instead of spraying poison on the past.
> ...




You mean the fta that howard started.
Rudd was viewed as a weirdo in China and they didn't exactly like being called "rat fcukers". All he did was pinch policy.

Like I said labor is great at fcuking up an easy ride. Or promising the world with unfunded policy.
And while the libs are not much better, they will suffer the boring stuff to make inroads for business to flourish.
Scratch the surface on labors policy and it's all smoke and mirrors until all you have left is 'gay marriage'.


----------



## Tisme (8 March 2016)

moXJO said:


> You mean the fta that howard started.
> .





Yeah if he started it then yes. He's not Rudd, Gillard, Abbott nor Turnbull. He is the same bloke that tried to turn Australia away from Whitlam's Asia and to the USA if you want to go down that hate fueled track.

We need to focus on the issues rather than accepting the packaged deal that bundles unsavoury policy like homosexual marriage, forced gender blindness, unskilled and non assimilable immigration, enforced tolerance of religious savages, Tanya Plibersek, Andrew Bolt, etc

We need choice, not repackaged Samsung engines in Sony plastic enclosures.


----------



## Tisme (8 March 2016)

Listening to Malcolm Turnbull this morning, it's still Labor's fault for the LNP's inability to fulfill their election commitments.

When all else fails, sit on your hands and cop out.


----------



## Tisme (8 March 2016)

Following on from Turnbull's blame game, if the Collins class subs started under Hawke/Keating, what did the Howard govt do to have the next generation well advanced 17 years later?


----------



## moXJO (8 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> He is the same bloke that tried to turn Australia away from Whitlam's Asia and to the USA if you want to go down that hate fueled track.




You might want to check that statement.


----------



## Tisme (8 March 2016)

moXJO said:


> You might want to check that statement.




Don't need to ... I was there.

However if you want a random Google read:


http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/uq:10902/mb-aa-03.pdf


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2016)

What do we think, yes or no ?

Personally I wouldn't mind giving you know who a scare.

Long-range nuclear-capable bombers could be based in Australia, US general reveals

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-...-could-rotate-through-nt-general-says/7231098


----------



## DB008 (8 March 2016)

I don't think that Turnbull will make it. Come next election, gone...


----------



## luutzu (8 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What do we think, yes or no ?
> 
> Personally I wouldn't mind giving you know who a scare.
> 
> ...




Don't think we have a say Sir R.

Saw an old early 1990s docu by John Pilger where the US have something like 120 bases in the UK, yes, 120 bases in the UK - and a few of them stored those ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile - with nukes), all aimed at Russia and the iron curtain. 

They also have it in Germany, Turkey, and probably all over the place West of Berlin.

Some expert was saying how US/Pentagon planners don't mind waging a nuclear war against Russia on European soil. Who would mind I guess. And Pilger was saying how if the US decided to use them nukes for some reason, they may or may not tell British Parliament about it... or tell it as a courtesy and do it anyway. World peace and all that.

So Darwin and Australia... sure why not. I guess if it gets there the whole world is stuffed and it'd be better to get instantly vaporised than walking around in the aftermath.

Crazy world man.


----------



## qldfrog (10 March 2016)

how 50 (and probably 150 billions of your(and mine, and my childrens's children)  taxes spent in obsolete before being born technology will be blown to pieces:
http://i-hls.com/2016/03/darpas-anti-submarine-autonomous-ship-is-ready-for-launch/
unless the Chineses (or others ) are so incompetent that they will be unable to built similar toys...

50 billions.Dimwits...that, the crap fighters  amazing


----------



## dutchie (10 March 2016)

Turnbulls' achievements since stabbing Abbott in the back.

On policy (does he know what it means) - zero

On so called excellent communication skills - "waffle, waffle, waffle.........."

Even Bill has a policy or two.

You can't run a country on charm.


----------



## Tisme (10 March 2016)

dutchie said:


> Turnbulls' achievements since stabbing Abbott in the back.
> 
> On policy (does he know what it means) - zero
> 
> ...




Like so many self made people, he doesn't need to know what he's talking about, he just has to create a vacuum that capable people fill.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 March 2016)

dutchie said:


> Turnbulls' achievements since stabbing Abbott in the back.
> 
> On policy (does he know what it means) - zero
> 
> ...




He's at least a bit alive.

I saw Bill on breakfast TV and he looked as if he'd been dragged out of bed. Expressionless, monotone, no enthusiasm at all.

But yes, Turnbull waffles on interminably at times. I usually have to turn him off.


----------



## Logique (10 March 2016)

English translation appreciated. The graphic is amusing, if inaccurate. 

If Betty has turned against you, it's a sure thing that so have plenty of her inner city fellow travellers.  Malcolm better get out quick, and start talking climate change and gay marriage 'equality'.



> Why the Sea of Malcolm has lost its sparkle - March 9, 2016
> 
> Elizabeth Farrelly
> SYDNEY MORNING HERALD COLUMNIST, AUTHOR, ARCHITECTURE CRITIC AND ESSAYIST
> ...


----------



## Tisme (10 March 2016)

I'm not sure Australians want to go down the too soon route of remembering the parallels with Gillard calling an early election after knifing Rudd, only to watch the him doing her slowly after it. Electors may feel they are doing Malcolm a disservice by voting him (LNP) into such a toxic environment.

Surely the LNP have to give Tony the heave ho ..... a posting to his beloved China maybe, a stipend to assist Kevin in the UN?


----------



## Knobby22 (10 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> I'm not sure Australians want to go down the too soon route of remembering the parallels with Gillard calling an early election after knifing Rudd, only to watch the him doing her slowly after it. Electors may feel they are doing Malcolm a disservice by voting him (LNP) into such a toxic environment.
> 
> Surely the LNP have to give Tony the heave ho ..... a posting to his beloved China maybe, a stipend to assist Kevin in the UN?




That is a good point Tisme.
Abbott promising to hang around is a real turn off for me personally.
If Tony, the right and the rentseekers make Turnbull wimp out on reform, then what's the point of voting for them? 
Turnbull has to be willing to fight to achieve or the election will be lost. Abbotts incredibly bad tenure at being PM has left a sour taste. Some of the Libs are operating in a bubble and don't realise how serious this election is to them and what the people think.


----------



## moXJO (10 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> Don't need to ... I was there.
> 
> However if you want a random Google read:
> 
> ...




Yeah I was there too.

Few other things I remember too:

I clearly remember labor telling the liberals that it was madness to invest taxpayers money into mining infrastructure and that the should be investing into technology. This was at the height of 1999. Always got a laugh out of that. 
Bit like Wayne swan saying to Costello 
"Everything is roses" when Costello mentioned the financial crisis was about to hit.

Labor is always late to the party. Guaranteed if they bring out a policy on something, then that asset has peaked and is on a downward slide.


----------



## Logique (15 March 2016)

The designer trainers would probably feed these kids for a month 

Spectacularly inappropriate. How will Treasury keep the wardrobe up to her if she becomes PM


----------



## Tisme (15 March 2016)

What's the difference between Gillard doing deals with the Greens and Turnbull doing the same?

Liberal + Greens + Nationals = surely the new tripartite alliance should be coming in for some clever derogatory labels from the usual quarter, perhaps our venerable Townsville member can come up with one.


----------



## Logique (15 March 2016)

Bill Shorten - not unimpressive at the National Press Club address today today.

Labor have stolen  a march on the Coalition.  Shorten hit all the expected policy notes in his address.    

And the Liberals doing deals with the Greens in Victoria. Way to sway the edgy voters Malcolm.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 March 2016)

Logique said:


> Bill Shorten - not unimpressive at the National Press Club address today today.
> 
> Labor have stolen  a march on the Coalition.  Shorten hit all the expected policy notes in his address.
> 
> And the Liberals doing deals with the Greens in Victoria. Way to sway the edgy voters Malcolm.




A lot of people are writing little Bill off.

An unwise action imo.


----------



## Bob (16 March 2016)

A good (and accurate) read from Noel Whittaker.  Finally the truth......

My article in last weekend's Sun Herald on negative gearing resulted in a flood of emails, many of which supported me, and many which did not. That's fine – a debate is always good – but it's also important to put the facts out there.
I made the point that most people who negative gear are ordinary Australians in lower tax brackets. A couple of readers claimed this was nonsense, citing figures showing that the tax breaks through negative gearing went to the top two tax brackets. When you look at the structure of our tax system that's obvious. If you have a progressive tax system that involves giving a tax deduction in some circumstances, the biggest benefit must go to the highest income earner. They are the ones paying the highest tax anyway.
On the latest figures I have, there are 251,000 individual taxpayers (1.5%) who pay 26% of the total income tax. They are in the top bracket.  In the second-top bracket there are 1.6 million taxpayers (9.4%) paying 35% of the total income tax. This means that 10.9% of taxpayers pay 61% of the total income tax.
If you have a taxable income of less than $80,000 a year, either you are reducing it because of your negative-gearing deductions, or you  cannot afford to take on an investment property that requires propping up every month out of your own cashflow.
But, as Margaret Lomas points out, most people who negative gear into residential property are positively geared within five years. Looking into the future, most investors in residential property will not qualify for the age pension because of their level of assets, and will be forced to sell property to provide funds to live on. That should trigger a big capital gains tax bill, which would be far greater than the small amount of tax deductions they claimed in the early years.
Other readers claimed that very high-income earners such as medical specialists were the biggest “abusers” of negative gearing. In my experience that's simply not true. High-income earners fall into two categories: those who spend so much on overseas holidays and school fees that they are always in debt; and those who are good money managers, who tend to invest in property syndicates, development projects, and maybe their own premises. I have yet to meet one with a swag of residential investment properties.
There is one element of the Labor proposal which is frightening. That is to restrict negative gearing to new homes only. It's a basic property principle that you make your money in real estate by looking for a run-down property in a great location and add value to it by cheap renovation. By restricting negative gearing to new properties, ordinary investors will be enticed to buy new properties where the profit has already been made by the developer.
This will not affect the wealthy. Because of the continual attacks on superannuation, a wealthy person with $180,000 in the bank is hardly likely to contribute it to superannuation as a non-concessional contribution. They are more likely to use it as a deposit on a top established property – the deal will be positively geared from the outset because of their big deposit.


----------



## banco (16 March 2016)

Bob said:


> A good (and accurate) read from Noel Whittaker.  Finally the truth......
> 
> My article in last weekend's Sun Herald on negative gearing resulted in a flood of emails, many of which supported me, and many which did not. That's fine – a debate is always good – but it's also important to put the facts out there.
> I made the point that most people who negative gear are ordinary Australians in lower tax brackets. A couple of readers claimed this was nonsense, citing figures showing that the tax breaks through negative gearing went to the top two tax brackets. When you look at the structure of our tax system that's obvious. If you have a progressive tax system that involves giving a tax deduction in some circumstances, the biggest benefit must go to the highest income earner. They are the ones paying the highest tax anyway.
> ...




self-interest dressed up in the fine feathers of principle


----------



## orr (16 March 2016)

Bob said:


> A good (and accurate) read from Noel Whittaker.  Finally the truth......
> 
> 
> This will not affect the wealthy. Because of the continual attacks on superannuation, a wealthy person with $180,000 in the bank is hardly likely to contribute it to superannuation as a non-concessional contribution. They are more likely to use it as a deposit on a top established property – the deal will be positively geared from the outset because of their big deposit.





 If someone see's value of investment in the form of a positively geared property, or any asset in a market for that matter, that market is simply working in an undistorted form. NG distorts that metric. 
Should a Government policy distort a market?
Why is it that negative gearing is quarantined to realestate investment?
Outwardly NG appears as a fundamental 'Command Economy' tool i.e. Government says invest in this and we give 'special  help' or invest in something else and we (GOV) don't .

My personal opinion is that NG on realestate investment should be 'grandfathered' over the medium term... the reason; because it is a market distortion. 

If it NG could be used to direct private funding toward a particular area to kick start an underdeveloped region or industry opportunity, I'd be happy to entertain the argument .
Just so there's no misunderstanding here 'Command Economy' is State control ... State and their mates in this case.


----------



## luutzu (16 March 2016)

Bob said:


> A good (and accurate) read from Noel Whittaker.  Finally the truth......
> 
> My article in last weekend's Sun Herald on negative gearing resulted in a flood of emails, many of which supported me, and many which did not. That's fine – a debate is always good – but it's also important to put the facts out there.
> I made the point that most people who negative gear are ordinary Australians in lower tax brackets. A couple of readers claimed this was nonsense, citing figures showing that the tax breaks through negative gearing went to the top two tax brackets. When you look at the structure of our tax system that's obvious. If you have a progressive tax system that involves giving a tax deduction in some circumstances, the biggest benefit must go to the highest income earner. They are the ones paying the highest tax anyway.
> ...




Read some other SMH replied to the Treasurer's, and above article's, claims that NG are often poor(er) people. That it's misleading because the figures cited are income AFTER the negative gearing(s).

The author was saying it's like that joke where a murderer asked to judge to be lenient on him for killing his parents because he's now an orphan.


----------



## Logique (17 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> A lot of people are writing little Bill off.
> 
> An unwise action imo.



The Opposition is looking better in Question Time. 

The Coalition government, like so many regressive deer in the headlight.

The Opposition says to the Government - do you want the kids, the first home buyers, to be able to buy their first home or not?  Or are you backing the investor/speculator to negative gear into their 7th investment property? Afterwards to raise the rent with each new tenancy agreement?

It's a powerful argument.


----------



## drsmith (17 March 2016)

Looking at a recent Essential Media poll on NG, Labor's presently losing the argument with 41% for and 37% against which is interesting given the mess that was the government's initial responses.

The problem for the Turnbull government at present is what could now be described as the now recalcitrant right wing restricting his options. That's the price he's paying as a result of his leadership challenge. That will hopefully change after an election victory. Sportbet still has the Coalition as short priced favourites there.


----------



## drsmith (18 March 2016)

After an all-nighter, the government's senate voting reforms have just been passed by the senate.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 March 2016)

drsmith said:


> After an all-nighter, the government's senate voting reforms have just been passed by the senate.




What a farce.

Xenophon had the right idea, make fun of it all.


----------



## Tisme (18 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What a farce.
> 
> Xenophon had the right idea, make fun of it all.




Even the stalwart Libs down the pub last night were arguing the govt is taking our voting rights away = not happy. Paul Keating and unrepresentative swill?


----------



## SirRumpole (18 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> Even the stalwart Libs down the pub last night were arguing the govt is taking our voting rights away = not happy. Paul Keating and unrepresentative swill?




I doubt think that there is any doubt that people are getting in to the Senate who very few people vote for. The question is, is that a good thing or not ?

Maybe having a few "regular people" like Muir in Parliament isn't a bad thing to give a grass roots view, but that won't happen any more.


----------



## drsmith (19 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> Even the stalwart Libs down the pub last night were arguing the govt is taking our voting rights away = not happy. Paul Keating and unrepresentative swill?



Essential Media did a poll on the above senate reforms earlier in the month. The results were 53% approval and 16% disapproval.

What was the patronage at the above pub that night? The joint must have been really rockin to the senate debate that night attracting all and sundry from far and wide if it outstripped the Essental Media poll sample.


----------



## Logique (19 March 2016)

The Government'a attack on the ALP negative gearing policy was a farrago of half truths, scare tactics, mixed with a flood of crocodile tears for a privileged few with multiple investment properties (including many pollies). 

All under cover of parliamentary privilege.  Under these circumstances, Labor would see the latest Essential poll on this as very encouraging.

Essential Report polls being such a yardstick to you Doc, you would also have noticed that Malcolm Turnbull's approval rating is sinking, and his disapproval rating is rising. 

Also that Labor's first preference polling is surging, which is why the gap has narrowed to 50:50 on 2pp.


----------



## basilio (19 March 2016)

I think Malcolm Turnbull is toast.  The decision to trash the Safe Schools program under the pressure of Corey Bernardi and co has destroyed any semblance of Malcolm's integrity.

In every way Malcolm is now the collective xitch of the extreme right wing. He will be seen as a sock puppet - perhaps good for winning an election but when it comes to policy he will toe the line. I am struggling to see how he can change this view of his  situation. Just so unseemly.

Let's see how the next polls run.


----------



## drsmith (19 March 2016)

Logique said:


> The Government'a attack on the ALP negative gearing policy was a farrago of half truths, scare tactics, mixed with a flood of crocodile tears for a privileged few with multiple investment properties (including many pollies).
> 
> All under cover of parliamentary privilege.  Under these circumstances, Labor would see the latest Essential poll on this as very encouraging.
> 
> ...



You will have no doubt seen my post at the top of the page above.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

With regard to Safe Schools, my view is that the majority of the government's changes are good. 

Gillian Triggs,



> Human Rights Commission president Gillian Triggs welcomed the review.
> 
> "It's been a proper process. It's based on a lot of experience and I think that, for the moment, it would be reasonable to accept this," she said.
> 
> "But perhaps in the future, when the program has been properly and fully assessed — parents have discussed it with school teachers — then it might be appropriate to extend it to slightly younger students."




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-...ying-victorian-government-to-continue/7260268

I'm not sure I'm in agreement with her final point but at the same time, one aspect of the government's review I'm also not sure about is for the parents to be able to opt their kids out. That's under the general principal that if it's part of core curriculum, it shouldn't be optional.


----------



## Tisme (20 March 2016)

drsmith said:


> Essential Media did a poll on the above senate reforms earlier in the month. The results were 53% approval and 16% disapproval.
> 
> What was the patronage at the above pub that night? The joint must have been really rockin to the senate debate that night attracting all and sundry from far and wide if it outstripped the Essental Media poll sample.




Hey I wasn't seeking a Perry Mason response. The comments were from the locals who are pretty much all self confessed LNP voters (I have yet to meet an ALP head who will admit to it here). The general attitude is that fiddling with voting is wrong.... afterall it's the Liberal mantra isn't it... freedom from social engineering?


----------



## orr (20 March 2016)

The razor thin preselection of IPA ideolog Wilson to Robb's old seat will only detract from the the gross base of LNP support... It's one way to use whatever political capital you got left... Abbott's first budget was book and verse from the IPA agenda, 'a crock'.
The elevation of 'done nothing dolts' in the vain of Wilson speaks volumes about donations and the backhand influence of the IPA  on the LNP.

Wilson like so many others will have his public moment of regret and contrition,_'so many lost oppertunaties, so many things we did wrong, so much social good we stymied'_ ....  around about the week he leaves parliament.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 March 2016)

orr said:


> The razor thin preselection of IPA ideolog Wilson to Robb's old seat will only detract from the the gross base of LNP support... It's one way to use whatever political capital you got left... Abbott's first budget was book and verse from the IPA agenda, 'a crock'.
> The elevation of 'done nothing dolts' in the vain of Wilson speaks volumes about donations and the backhand influence of the IPA  on the LNP.
> 
> Wilson like so many others will have his public moment of regret and contrition,_'so many lost oppertunaties, so many things we did wrong, so much social good we stymied'_ ....  around about the week he leaves parliament.




Wilson was a complete waste of $400k pa.

At least we will save something on his salary. The government should delete his old position on the HRC and not replace him.


----------



## Logique (20 March 2016)

Don't agree with all Wilson's politics, but can't begrudge him the win, given the dirty tactics used against him.



> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-...beral-preselection-goldstein-election/7260762
> 
> ...Preselection victory comes after dirty campaign
> 
> ...


----------



## drsmith (20 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> Hey I wasn't seeking a Perry Mason response. The comments were from the locals who are pretty much all self confessed LNP voters (I have yet to meet an ALP head who will admit to it here). The general attitude is that fiddling with voting is wrong.... afterall it's the Liberal mantra isn't it... freedom from social engineering?



You may not like it but you're in the minority if the broader EM poll from earlier this month is any guide.


----------



## Tink (21 March 2016)

Logique said:


> Don't agree with all Wilson's politics, but can't begrudge him the win, given the dirty tactics used against him.




Agree, Logique.

Even though I disagree with this safe schools propaganda
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...t=25851&page=5&p=900734&viewfull=1#post900734 

Tim Wilson was one that voiced concerns with the government early last year ahead of the current review.

_“Prior to the current *review commencing, Tim Wilson made clear to me - Education Minister Simon Birmingham - his concerns *regarding the conduct of the Safe Schools Coalition program, particularly the age appropriateness of some material,”_

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...n/news-story/0276b411a1e0826d8dd976bc4796830c


----------



## Tisme (21 March 2016)

Tink said:


> Agree, Logique.
> 
> Even though I disagree with this safe schools propaganda
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...t=25851&page=5&p=900734&viewfull=1#post900734
> ...




I'm guessing people are going to have to weigh up their political glue with their moral compasses. 

Personally I find Tim to be disingenuous, probably because he has lived a secret life. Simon Birmingham's word for it is not the best reference given the lies and compromises politicians are famous for.


----------



## Tisme (21 March 2016)

drsmith said:


> You may not like it but you're in the minority if the broader EM poll from earlier this month is any guide.




Hmmm, let's recap..... I am not trapped into a political party like (including you I presume) many are for many a reason, the most plausible being parental conditioning.  

And it would be fair to say the people down the (local) pub, while not your city suburban types, are not the Christopher Sly persona of your good self. 

However they are probably wealthier than most by a large factor and they do play an active role in community and politics, presumably bank rolling the LNP. Sufficed to say they have needed nearly 16 years of my itinerant visits and final permanency to take me into their bosom and trust a man who has the balls to admit he is not as stupid as they to put any faith in party politics.... that and the pretty women I bring into the place now and then


----------



## Tisme (21 March 2016)

Should be interesting to see what comes of the imminent double dissolution (just announced by Malcolm), based on the Building Industry Bill when all those EBA paid Negative Gearers race to sell off their investment.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> Should be interesting to see what comes of the imminent double dissolution (just announced by Malcolm), based on the Building Industry Bill when all those EBA paid Negative Gearers race to sell off their investment.




Pretty good tactics I reckon.

Force the Senate cross benches to choose between political survival or going back on their 'principles' .

Yes sir, will be very interesting.


----------



## drsmith (21 March 2016)

At the end of senate sittings last week, Penny Wong moved a motion to require majority approval of the senate to bring forward sittings from May 10 to May 3. This I think was in relation to budget timing and passed with the support of the Greens. That today appears to have been well and truly outflanked by the government.

I didn't see any prior commentary in relation to Malcolm Turnbull's move today. It appears to have been kept under wraps very well by the government. 

Now it's over to the senate X-bench.


----------



## chode84 (21 March 2016)

Gillard is looking like a pretty good leader/negotiator right now compared to Turnbull and Abbott with their majority Governments.


----------



## drsmith (21 March 2016)

chode84 said:


> Gillard is looking like a pretty good leader/negotiator right now compared to Turnbull and Abbott with their majority Governments.



The legislative environment for the Gillard government has been covered many times on these pages.

It, in short, had a majority in the senate through its alliance with the Greens to form that government.


----------



## pixel (21 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> Should be interesting to see what comes of the imminent double dissolution (just announced by Malcolm), based on the Building Industry Bill when all those EBA paid Negative Gearers race to sell off their investment.




Looks like another episode of "Malcolm in the Middle" evolving.
He's caught between "No-more-Union-Bashing" Shorten and "No-Sniping" Abbott. 

Can't wait to find out what, if any, impact the High Court challenge may have on the Senate Ballot.


----------



## banco (21 March 2016)

drsmith said:


> The legislative environment for the Gillard government has been covered many times on these pages.
> 
> It, in short, had a majority in the senate through its alliance with the Greens to form that government.




This is rewriting history. They didn't have any formal agreement with the Greens on the Senate.


----------



## basilio (21 March 2016)

Well surprise, surprise, surprise.

A double dissolution election on July 2nd if the union bashing legislation(and only the union bashing legislation..)  can be rejected again..

A few months ago I would have thought the new Malcolm Turnball would have romped in.  Today I think he will have a serious fight on his hands.

When Malcolm was elected over Tony Abbott "we thought" that we finally had a contemporary, Liberal PM who was going to modernise a party that had gone ferally rightwing.

Doesn't look like that now does it ? It seems that the right has very firm control over the ultimate agenda of the party and that Malcolm will be allowed to stay PM as long as he doesn't rock the boat *and* wins the next election. It will be interesting for example to see what sort of policy Malcolm takes into the election on climate change action, the trashing of the CSIRO's  climate research capacities, gay marriage, and other social issues.

My observation is that he will never be allowed to implement policies in these areas that aren't approved by the Bernardi's, Christensons and Albetz's of the coalition.  

If he said otherwise he would be either publicly challenged by said pollies or no one would believe him.


----------



## wayneL (21 March 2016)

basilio said:


> Well surprise, surprise, surprise.
> 
> A double dissolution election on July 2nd if the union bashing legislation(and only the union bashing legislation..)  can be rejected again..
> 
> ...




So Mal was cool so long as he was a de facto Labor PM?

We don't need two socialist dystopian parties in Oz. While I agree the right is creating problems for our Mal, he must establish a power base in the center to do good. We shall see if he,can do that successfully in due course. Give him time.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 March 2016)

wayneL said:


> Give him time.




He's got untill the election.


----------



## Knobby22 (21 March 2016)

It's winning the election that should shore up his base, as long as it isn't too close.

I just hope he manages to bring down a good budget.


----------



## wayneL (21 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> He's got untill the election.




Indeed, "interesting" choice confronts us.

Dysfunctional liberal democratism with conservative overtones

Or dysfunctional liberal democratism with communist overtones.

joy


----------



## SirRumpole (21 March 2016)

wayneL said:


> Indeed, "interesting" choice confronts us.
> 
> Dysfunctional liberal democratism with conservative overtones
> 
> ...




Not another reds under the bed conspiracy theorist !?

Communism has been dead in this country for decades.

Just ask noco.


----------



## wayneL (21 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Not another reds under the bed conspiracy theorist !?
> 
> Communism has been dead in this country for decades.
> 
> Just ask noco.




The reds are green these days.


----------



## drsmith (21 March 2016)

The following analysis isn't a bad one,



> Malcolm Turnbull has transformed his prime ministership at one stroke.
> 
> The picture emerging from his first six months was that he was wasting his time. We now see that he has been biding his time.
> 
> ...




http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...-his-time-not-wasting-it-20160321-gnnflt.html


----------



## sptrawler (21 March 2016)

Well doc, he has certainly called the senate crossbenchers bluff, let's see how that pans out. 
If a DD is called, it could quite easily end up with a coalition majority in both houses.
It will be a testing time for Bill, who is skating on thin ice anyway. 
Fairfax and the ABC, will have to get into overdrive to get Bill over the line.


----------



## Tisme (22 March 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Well doc, he has certainly called the senate crossbenchers bluff, let's see how that pans out.
> If a DD is called, it could quite easily end up with a coalition majority in both houses.
> It will be a testing time for Bill, who is skating on thin ice anyway.
> Fairfax and the ABC, will have to get into overdrive to get Bill over the line.




I wonder how clever Richard Di Natale thinks he is, having been schoolkid tricked into supporting the Senate reform bill.


----------



## Tisme (22 March 2016)

Scott Morrison must be feeling like Nigel No Friends, having been left out of the secret squirrel announcement yesterday. He's on radio telling everyone how he's got the insider knowledge and then Malcolm has a press conference less than an hour later and trashes Scott's story LOL


----------



## Logique (22 March 2016)

drsmith said:


> The following analysis isn't a bad one,
> http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...-his-time-not-wasting-it-20160321-gnnflt.html



Points for decisive leadership anyway. Tony Abbott could have employed a similar strategy, especially early on in his tenure, but pulled back, to his political detriment.

The cross bench Senators will make interesting viewing, as the reality of their position hits home.


----------



## Craton (22 March 2016)

PM with big kahuna's? 
About time!

At last, a PM who is not scared of losing the incumbency to advance Australia's interests. Just what this little voter wants to see coz am sick and tired of a stymied govt.

Interesting times indeed!


----------



## drsmith (22 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> Scott Morrison must be feeling like Nigel No Friends, having been left out of the secret squirrel announcement yesterday. He's on radio telling everyone how he's got the insider knowledge and then Malcolm has a press conference less than an hour later and trashes Scott's story LOL



The following is an interesting read,

http://www.afr.com/news/politics/ho...lcolm-turnbull-outfoxed-labor-20160321-gnn5aa



> A draft of the advice was sent to Sir Peter on Sunday for his consideration. On Sunday afternoon the Liberal leadership group met to discuss the tactic. On Monday morning, Mr Turnbull, undetected, drove to Government House at Yarralumla to formally request Sir Peter prorogue the parliament and order the special sittings.
> 
> Sir Peter gave his approval by letter at 9.15am.
> 
> Then, after cabinet gave it the nod at a 10am phone hook-up, Turnbull announced it half an hour later and then the party room rubber stamped it at a 11.30am hook-up.




You'll note that even as late as yesterday morning before the announcement, it was still a work in progress.


----------



## drsmith (22 March 2016)

Logique said:


> Points for decisive leadership anyway. Tony Abbott could have employed a similar strategy, especially early on in his tenure, but pulled back, to his political detriment.
> 
> The cross bench Senators will make interesting viewing, as the reality of their position hits home.



Judging by the response to a contribution by the former PM yesterday evening, the PM now seems more confident in taking on the opposition within the government.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-...ght-to-claim-full-credit-for-policies/7265502

For the independents, it will depend on how they ultimately view their electoral prospect and how that compares to the status quo. They now have a few weeks to work through that.


----------



## Tisme (22 March 2016)

Craton said:


> PM with big kahuna's?
> About time!
> 
> At last, a PM who is not scared of losing the incumbency to advance Australia's interests. Just what this little voter wants to see coz am sick and tired of a stymied govt.
> ...




It seems to be the Liberal Party's favourite manouvre when they don't get their own way/ can't negotiate = Calling section 5


----------



## Craton (22 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> It seems to be the Liberal Party's favourite manouvre when they don't get their own way/ can't negotiate = Calling section 5




Heh heh, yeah, and perhaps they ALL should be put on a Section 9.


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> It seems to be the Liberal Party's favourite manouvre when they don't get their own way/ can't negotiate = Calling section 5




They could have adopted the labor manouvre, of complete capitulation to the minority, then call it negotiation.

Abbott should have called a DD after the last election, he just didn't have the ticker for it, now he has paid for it.


----------



## Tisme (22 March 2016)

sptrawler said:


> They could have adopted the labor manouvre, of complete capitulation to the minority, then call it negotiation.




I can't argue with that.


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Well doc, he has certainly called the senate crossbenchers bluff, let's see how that pans out.
> If a DD is called, it could quite easily end up with a coalition majority in both houses.
> It will be a testing time for Bill, who is skating on thin ice anyway.
> Fairfax and the ABC, will have to get into overdrive to get Bill over the line.




Well I see the ABC "the drum", has started the salvo's.

Today on their website.
"Turnbull might pull the DD trigger and shoot himself in the foot".
"Dear media Turnbull isn't decisive, he's desperate".
"Somethings missing in Turnbulls early election plan".
"Turnbulls only option bluff or bravado".

Maybe an article on something of an alternative, would be good.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 March 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Well I see the ABC "the drum", has started the salvo's.
> 
> Today on their website.
> "Turnbull might pull the DD trigger and shoot himself in the foot".
> ...




When you have IPA wonks like Chris Berg criticising the government, something is up.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-22/berg-turnbull's-only-real-option-was-bluff-and-bravado/7264350

Maybe Turnbull isn't Right enough for them.


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> When you have IPA wonks like Chris Berg criticising the government, something is up.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-22/berg-turnbull's-only-real-option-was-bluff-and-bravado/7264350
> 
> Maybe Turnbull isn't Right enough for them.




Oh so from that, Chris Berg, is a moral and political compass. Unless his avatar is ancient, I would take his political leanings the same as my middle aged children's. 

Best of luck.lol

I actually am disappointed with Labors ineptness, everyone expected Abbott to be rolled, now nobody seems to be able to fill the media vacuum.

It was always about hating Abbott, now he's gone, they have to make Turnbull the bad guy.

Very hard to do in a short campaign, just another example of be careful what you wish for.

The media were screaming for Turnbull, now they have him, they have to make him the bad guy.lol

Australia, run by breakfast t.v and McDonalds.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 March 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Oh so from that, Chris Berg, is a moral and political compass. Unless his avatar is ancient, I would take his political leanings the same as my middle aged children's.
> 
> Best of luck.lol
> 
> ...




The media are more feral than the politicians, few of them have the brains to understand policy so they go for the cheap gotchas.

Neither side escapes, Murdoch goes for the Labor pollies, ABC goes for the Libs so I suppose there is some balance overall.


----------



## Tisme (22 March 2016)

A week ago we were all told by honest as the day is long that the budget would be this date and the election would be full term and then we find out that was all a lie.... yet no one seems to give a thought to the fact that the head of govt has lied to the electorate ... we are so conditioned to accepting politicians lying that it is apparently alright, so long as it is of the same party we have chosen as our totem....weak as pi$$ IMO.


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The media are more feral than the politicians, few of them have the brains to understand policy so they go for the cheap gotchas.
> 
> Neither side escapes, Murdoch goes for the Labor pollies, ABC goes for the Libs so I suppose there is some balance overall.




I agree completely, but it doesn't make for a balanced analysis of our predicament.

This is IMO the whole problem, the media is driven by emotional headlines, when Australia need rational thinking.

We really are caught in a cleft stick, small population therefore small market, so no underlying fundamentals for manufacturing.

Why manufacture something here, when you can fill a ship to 60% capacity with raw materials?

It makes much more sense, to manufacture the product where the market demand is, rather than here.

It is logics, why would you produce and export a car from here? 
When we only buy 1million cars a year, yet the world buys 600million cars a year, it makes more sense to export the raw material.

The wastage in transporting cars because the spacial volume/ weight is immense, when compared to the volumetric filling of a tanker or ore carrier.

So we were never going to be the car manufacturing country of choice. Yet the media flogged "the death of the Australian car industry to death".

Logically, it should have been shown for what it was, a taxpayer funded job scheme.

All the Australian Governments tried valiantly, to encourage an expansion of the Australian car industry, the companies weren't interested.

I guess what I'm saying is, it's about time the reporters started reporting the real issues, that are going to highlight the problem Australia is facing.

Instead of reporting garbage and trying to be comedians, they should focus on what is going to underpin our lifestyle.

Well that's my rant, I like to dedicate it to Julia, as she would have liked it.IMO


----------



## wayneL (23 March 2016)

Exactly sptrawler & Horace

I can't even stand reading the paper anymore, it's all about whiteanting the governemnet, the opposition, whoever. It's poisonous.

This is why we can't have nice things in this country, overwhelming negativity.


----------



## CanOz (23 March 2016)

The big trouble with the media is that they have dramatic effects on those among us too lazy or ill equiped to rationalise their sensational stories....they end up as Trump supporters have, angry, disenfranchised, ill informed and unable to consider another side of the story.


----------



## CanOz (23 March 2016)

wayneL said:


> Exactly sptrawler & Horace
> 
> I can't even stand reading the paper anymore, it's all about whiteanting the governemnet, the opposition, whoever. It's poisonous.
> 
> This is why we can't have nice things in this country, overwhelming negativity.




Since I've returned, I watch the evening news occasionally, but have read no print media....seems to be doing the trick so far!


----------



## Tisme (23 March 2016)

CanOz said:


> Since I've returned, I watch the evening news occasionally, but have read no print media....seems to be doing the trick so far!





Absolutely ... I cancelled my subscription to the monopoly Courier Mail 15 months ago... the uplift was immediate and I kick myself for paying that mob to inflict daily misery on me for decades and the decades before, similarly, to the West Australian.

Why I allowed myself to be bomdarded with political and social conditioning escapes me, but I understand why some idealogues who are mentally incapable of railing against the machine, swallow the nonsense of, in particular, News Corp and it's fishwife journos like Bolt.


----------



## dutchie (23 March 2016)

Malcolm Turnbull rightly fears Scott Morrison.

Morrison is not in the "inner circle".

Turnbull is p#ss weak and has not justified the stabbing in the back of Abbott.

We will need someone stronger than Turnbull over the coming years.


----------



## drsmith (23 March 2016)

dutchie said:


> Malcolm Turnbull rightly fears Scott Morrison.



I saw a piece in the AFR last night about MT willing to do a deal with the state governments over health funding with the funds raised from measures like tobacco excise increase and tightening superannuation concessions.

In the lead up to the election at least, Malcolm Turnbull economically wants to be Labor lite whereas Scott Morrison wants tax reform and the difference is causing friction.

This is why the Turnbull government has thus far failed to establish an economic narrative. That and Tony Abbott lurking in the background but Malcolm there at least now appears more willing to put Tony in his box. 

Even a May 3 budget seems a long way away at the moment.


----------



## drsmith (23 March 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Well I see the ABC "the drum", has started the salvo's.
> 
> Today on their website.
> "Turnbull might pull the DD trigger and shoot himself in the foot".
> ...



What's interesting with the above is the contrast between the ABC's commentary above and that of the typically left leaning Fairfax press.

There hasn't been enough change in the Turnbull government to fit with the ABC's cultural leanings. What's probably disappointed the ABC the most is the continuity in the government's border protection policies. 

Interestingly this morning in relation to Fairfax, The Australian thus far is pushing harder issues between Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison than the SMH but there is some commentary today on that in the AFR.


----------



## Knobby22 (23 March 2016)

dutchie said:


> Malcolm Turnbull rightly fears Scott Morrison.
> 
> Morrison is not in the "inner circle".
> 
> ...




Abbott was useless. Turnbull is trying to get tax reform but the right are giving him a hard time, leaking and making stupid statements. I think you will find Morrison is more in line with Turnbull. The problem is that they need to produce a budget that is election material. 

You will find that if Turnbull wins this election fairly well he will be able to ignore the far right and achieve some major tax reform. All the far right seem to come up with is cut services and give the savings to big business and highly paid taxpayers, the uselessness of this approach is why Tony got the **** (among other things).

I respect Morrison and expect him to perform well. The so called "inner circle" are mostly "outer circle" now. That includes Bolt who now looks like a mad prophet. Just remember most Liberal voters want Abbott to quit or even resign now and not contest this election.

http://www.essentialvision.com.au/category/essentialreport


----------



## drsmith (23 March 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Bolt who now looks like a mad prophet.



Andrew Bolt is taking a long time to work through the stages of grief. He's still on stage 1.

He's getting a nightly show in May. Hopefully by then (after the budget), he can move on.


----------



## Craton (23 March 2016)

@sptrawler. Great rant, Julia would be proud. 



Tisme said:


> Absolutely ... I cancelled my subscription to the monopoly Courier Mail 15 months ago... the uplift was immediate and I kick myself for paying that mob to inflict daily misery on me for decades and the decades before, similarly, to the West Australian.
> 
> Why I allowed myself to be bomdarded with political and social conditioning escapes me, but I understand why some idealogues who are mentally incapable of railing against the machine, swallow the nonsense of, in particular, News Corp and it's fishwife journos like Bolt.




Watching the "news" is a rarity at my place nowadays, rather watch the Food Network instead. Between my local paper subscription, radio, TV snippets and the internet (ASF), I'm inundated with more than enough info to drive me crazy. :bonk:

It's common knowledge that the media is great at creating sensational headlines to grab our attention and instill an emotive reaction. Those of us that know better simply see it for what it is or just switch off/don't read/don't buy into the drivel. That accounts for 20% of us, unfortunately the remaining 80% are the beige sheeple that hold sway when the ballot is counted.

Sorry, I shouldn't be so harsh but the way Australia has and continues to be hoodwinked by clever spin merchants, well I just cringe at the outcomes. Clive Palmer being a classic example. 

I do like the way MT comes across and how he isn't fazed by silly media questions like TA was. TA had his chance and he blew it and he certainly blew it with me when the G20 Summit was held here. TA's opening address was so cringe worthy I nearly hid under a rock as I was so embarrassed to be represented by him. I had to agree with Bill Shorten's response at the time where he described the address as "weird and graceless". That sort of sums up TA and am glad he no longer leads this great country of ours.

Also I don't think MT needs to explain why TA was removed. TA's "captain's call" sealed his fate IMO.

Re. the election early or otherwise, bring on the election debates between Mal and Bill. I dare them to "lie to me".


----------



## Tisme (24 March 2016)

*Re: The Turnbull Government - "hollow and oxymoronic"*

http://www.theguardian.com/australi...inuity-and-change-slogan-straight-out-of-veep



> The writer of Veep has labelled the slogan used by the Australian prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, “hollow and oxymoronic” after the government used almost the exact same “meaningless” phrase from season four of the political satire.
> 
> Turnbull and senior government ministers have been pushing the three-word slogan “continuity and change” in an attempt to distance his government from that of Tony Abbott.




As he sits back and waits for the "attack is better than defense" respondant(s)


----------



## SirRumpole (24 March 2016)

drsmith said:


> I saw a piece in the AFR last night about MT willing to do a deal with the state governments over health funding with the funds raised from measures like tobacco excise increase and tightening superannuation concessions.
> 
> In the lead up to the election at least, Malcolm Turnbull economically wants to be Labor lite whereas Scott Morrison wants tax reform and the difference is causing friction.
> 
> ...




Malcolm appointed Morrison, so maybe there was a lack of judgement there ?


----------



## drsmith (24 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Malcolm appointed Morrison, so maybe there was a lack of judgement there ?



Scott Morrison is a competent minister as demonstrated by his broad success as immigration minister.

As Knobby22 points out, the two halves may come together after the election. At the moment though, they don't seem to be pulling together and it's costing the government the economic narrative.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 March 2016)

Seems a lot fairer that hitting pensioners $7 to see the doctor.


Budget repair should be driven by tax hikes: CEDA report


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-29/budget-repair-should-be-driven-by-tax-hikes-ceda/7281422
--


----------



## SirRumpole (30 March 2016)

What a silly idea.

Complicate the tax system, introduce more bureaucracy, set up confusion by different tax rates in different States, and lay the groundwork for higher taxes in the future.

Give it away Malcolm.

*Tax reforms: Turnbull confirms radical proposal to allow states, territories to levy income taxes*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-30/turnbull-looks-to-correct-tax-failure/7284314


----------



## drsmith (30 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Budget repair should be driven by tax hikes: CEDA report
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-29/budget-repair-should-be-driven-by-tax-hikes-ceda/7281422
> --



Not enough overall emphasis on managing spending but there are some worthwhile individual ideas in there.

As I've noted before, tax base broadening measures should be directed at reducing marginal rates rather than chasing ever increasing spending.



SirRumpole said:


> What a silly idea.



Vertical fiscal imbalance is a real problem and as such has resulted in the states levying a variety of inefficient taxes. 

The response of some of the states to today's proposal has been interesting. Even without the regressive argument applied against raising the GST take, some still don't like it. Clearly, there's an element there of trying to avoid responsibility for their spending to their own constituency and instead continue to go to the federal government, begging bowl in hand.

Another way to deal with vertical fiscal imbalance is to abolish the states.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 March 2016)

drsmith said:


> Another way to deal with vertical fiscal imbalance is to abolish the states.




That's a much better option than adding extra bureaucracy to our already over governed country.

Either that or a Federal takeover of the public hospital system which is the State's biggest outlay and would provide us with an integrated system that we know who is responsible for.

The current revenue streams should then be sufficient for the States to do the rest of their job.


----------



## drsmith (30 March 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Either that or a Federal takeover of the public hospital system which is the State's biggest outlay and would provide us with an integrated system that we know who is responsible for.



Someone else suggested that and the response from the states on that wasn't overly warm either.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/rudd...keover-of-public-hospitals-20100303-phnp.html


----------



## SirRumpole (30 March 2016)

drsmith said:


> Someone else suggested that and the response from the states on that wasn't overly warm either.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/national/rudd...keover-of-public-hospitals-20100303-phnp.html




If I was a State Premier I would jump at the chance of off-loading public hospitals to the Feds unless I was getting more money for hospitals than I was actually spending on them.


----------



## Tisme (31 March 2016)

so Malcolm advocates devolving the taxation system to the states .... he's got a real republic agenda going now.


----------



## SirRumpole (31 March 2016)

Tisme said:


> so Malcolm advocates devolving the taxation system to the states .... he's got a real republic agenda going now.




Looks like he wants to be the Prime Minister of the Federal Government, not the Prime Minister of Australia.


----------



## Junior (31 March 2016)

This Malcolm Turnbull character made a hell of a lot more sense before he was prime minister.

Why the hell would we want 8 different income tax rates in this country?  Our tax system is complex enough without adding a whole new layer of complexity.  It would just provide another loophole for those trying to reduce their marginal tax rate.

Why not just re-jig the formula which determines how states are funded?  And if different tax rates are required, surely it's far easier to have different GST rates, rather than different income tax rates.

This is just another distraction, it will never happen.


----------



## dutchie (31 March 2016)

Malcolm is obviously not the Messiah, in fact he is pathetic.

Abbott runs circles around him (that's how bad he is).

Malcolm will lose the election all on his own.


----------



## Tisme (31 March 2016)

Junior said:


> This Malcolm Turnbull character made a hell of a lot more sense before he was prime minister.
> 
> Why the hell would we want 8 different income tax rates in this country?  .




there's few reasons of course:

Republicans by definition oppose concentration of central power;
Weakening the role of the executive to allow more scope for an El Presidente;
Opposing the ALP's long term agenda of terminating State legislatures and bringing local councils in to dispense services;

but one that none of the talking heads seems to have picked up is treatment of concessions... such as "negative gearing" .....do I hear pennies dropping?


----------



## wayneL (31 March 2016)

dutchie said:


> Malcolm is obviously not the Messiah, in fact he is pathetic.
> 
> Abbott runs circles around him (that's how bad he is).
> 
> Malcolm will lose the election all on his own.




And the truly frightening thing is that the alternative is Judas Iscariot. For Mal to lose, means voting for someone who should be hanging from a tree on Potters Hill.

Just wonderful.


----------



## CanOz (31 March 2016)

wayneL said:


> And the truly frightening thing is that the alternative is Judas Iscariot. For Mal to lose, means voting for someone who should be hanging from a tree on Potters Hill.
> 
> Just wonderful.




Agree, the political situation here is awful....almost as bad as the US will be.


----------



## drsmith (1 April 2016)

The politics behind the income tax share with the states is becoming clearer,



> Giving the states 2 per cent of income tax would provide them with about $14 billion in annual funding and save the federal budget an equivalent amount in grants that would be cut.
> 
> If the states needed more money, they would have to make their case to their own parliament and voters to raise the levy.
> 
> ...




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...m/news-story/ef87eb3252402fb30258613b97df8579

My bolds.


----------



## basilio (1 April 2016)

The next test of Malcolm Turnballs government will be how he responds to the the expose on business bribes and corruption.

The cross bench has been concerned that the union corruption legislation is too one sided.  They have already wanted similar legislation introduced to investigate business corruption. That is now going to be a demand.



> *Unaoil scandal draws in WorleyParsons*
> March 31 2016 - 8:35PM
> 
> Nick McKenzie, Richard Baker, Michael Bachelard, Daniel Quinlan
> ...




http://www.canberratimes.com.au/nat...orleyparsons-peter-gregg-20160330-gnuqas.html



> *
> Former Leighton executives to be called to Senate bribery inquiry
> Heath Aston March 31 2016 - 8:26PM
> *
> ...




http://www.canberratimes.com.au/fed...o-senate-bribery-inquiry-20160331-gnvd8j.html


----------



## SirRumpole (1 April 2016)

basilio said:


> The next test of Malcolm Turnballs government will be how he responds to the the expose on business bribes and corruption.
> 
> The cross bench has been concerned that the union corruption legislation is too one sided.  They have already wanted similar legislation introduced to investigate business corruption. That is now going to be a demand.
> 
> ...




Yep, there is corruption everywhere. If the government thought the CFMEU was corrupt they could have them de-registered, but companies that rip off customers and suppliers get away with a slap on the wrist.

The hypocrisy of the government is showing more and more each day.


----------



## Tisme (1 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yep, there is corruption everywhere. If the government thought the CFMEU was corrupt they could have them de-registered, but companies that rip off customers and suppliers get away with a slap on the wrist.
> 
> The hypocrisy of the government is showing more and more each day.




That's how it is with the Bunyip Aristocracy


----------



## CanOz (1 April 2016)

I reckon business has been corrupt a heckuva lot longer than unions have....what startles those of us from abroad is how the unions can become so influential in politics.....after they've been corrupt in unions!


----------



## moXJO (2 April 2016)

Business is there to turn a buck. 
Unions are meant to protect the working people. I've been affected by union corruption and power games while trying to do my job.
And I have been ripped off by phoenix builders as they scuttle the money and run.
The rules need to be tightened up and enforced on all sides.


----------



## Logique (2 April 2016)

Junior said:


> This Malcolm Turnbull character made a hell of a lot more sense before he was prime minister.
> 
> Why the hell would we want 8 different income tax rates in this country?  Our tax system is complex enough without adding a whole new layer of complexity.  It would just provide another loophole for those trying to reduce their marginal tax rate.
> 
> ...



Even the State Premiers understood what a fiasco tax collection by the States would turn out to be.


----------



## drsmith (2 April 2016)

Logique said:


> Even the State Premiers understood what a fiasco tax collection by the States would turn out to be.



While you could have different income tax rates across the states, the income tax itself could still be collected by the ATO. 

I think the idea was intended to fail at this point (not enough detail) and show the states as not wanting to take responsibility for the funding required for the services they provide. That political capital is now in the bank for the federal government to use in future negotiations with the states. The short term political optics though didn't look good which is interesting in itself in the lead up to a federal election.

In terms of additional funding from COAG, the federal government got off quiet lightly at $2.9b in health. Much bigger figures were getting thrown around in the media prior to COAG.

We can talk about reforming the tax base but if that's to plug cost shortfalls from areas of the budget growing out of proportion with GDP, you reach a point where those options run out but the fundamental problem remains leaving no options but to then increase tax rates. At some point, growing expenditure has to be addressed and it would be better addressed sooner rather than later and directing tax base measures to lower marginal rates in my view.


----------



## Logique (2 April 2016)

In a moment of levity, 

James Jeffrey, from behind the paywall of _The Australian_, asks:



> We ask: Is floating and killing a great big new tax plan in barely more than a handful of hours
> (a) agile, (b) innovative or (c) exciting?..


----------



## orr (4 April 2016)

Dennis Jensen... out.
An obvious liability, climate science denier. Broader community polling would have been his downfall and another distancing from the retrograde Abbott formula and the 'willed ignorance' of the lunar right.


----------



## Tisme (4 April 2016)

The Parliamentary Liberal Party must think we are "all" idiots. not just the rusted ons, if they want us to swallow the yarn that Malcolm was calling the Premier's bluff about states raising taxes. It's so awkward it's embarrassing to watch.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> The Parliamentary Liberal Party must think we are "all" idiots. not just the rusted ons, if they want us to swallow the yarn that Malcolm was calling the Premier's bluff about states raising taxes. It's so awkward it's embarrassing to watch.




It's a pretty cynical, but very sneaky tactic by Turnbull. 

I expect he never thought the Premiers would go for it, but now he has an automatic "out" whenever the States ask for money money, ie "you had the chance for more money but you knocked it back so don't blame us".

The only way we are going to get rid of this cynical political game play is to get rid of this government.


----------



## Tisme (4 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> It's a pretty cynical, but very sneaky tactic by Turnbull.
> 
> I expect he never thought the Premiers would go for it, but now he has an automatic "out" whenever the States ask for money money, ie "you had the chance for more money but you knocked it back so don't blame us".
> 
> The only way we are going to get rid of this cynical political game play is to get rid of this government.




Either a deliberate ruse or accidental tourist trying to cover his tracks, he has to wear the consequences of behaving with cunning and sly with the two biggest concerns of the public. The fella who sideswiped the public with a cliche was the other Malcolm, with both of them determined to mete out a mother altruism.


----------



## Tisme (5 April 2016)

Labor in front by two points now. 

Maybe Kevin Andrews can do better.... if only he would get rid of his Felix Unger appearance.


----------



## Knobby22 (5 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Labor in front by two points now.
> 
> Maybe Kevin Andrews can do better.... if only he would get rid of his Felix Unger appearance.




Kevin Andrews is delusional.


----------



## sptrawler (5 April 2016)

Well I think most of the Liberal voters on here, did say, Malcolm was a dud.
The last thing Australia needs is a wishy washy leader, with no b@lls, luckily Shorten fits that description also.


----------



## drsmith (5 April 2016)

The government's problem as reflected in the latest Newspoll remains a lack of cohesive economic narrative. 

Last week's state income tax suggestion while it exposed the states being inconsistent in relation to not directly levying the revenue they seek from the federal government was messy and while not as difficult to implement as some portrayed, was in itself inconsistent with spending restraint and lower taxes again sending a conflicting message from the government.

Labor for its part has been more consistent on the economic policy front, regardless of where one stands on the merits of individual police elements or how it suits as a whole. 

One would have logically expected that the Turnbull government would have had a cost to bare in terms of political capital with unity within the party and, in the end, he wasn't going to be what elements of the progressive side of politics expected.

The ongoing lack of a cohesive economic narrative though has been a surprise to me and I think what is largely reflected in the latest Newspoll.

Hopefully now with the states having been called on not wanting to do themselves what they ask of the federal government that the government has all the ducks lined up for a more cohesive economic narrative. Even that now won't retrieve all the political capital lost in this area. Without it however, the government is at a real risk of losing the election and that would be a very poor reflection on the present state of politics in Australia with the obvious consequences to the nation's economic prospects going forward.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Well I think most of the Liberal voters on here, did say, Malcolm was a dud.
> The last thing Australia needs is a wishy washy leader, with no b@lls, luckily Shorten fits that description also.




1. What would demonstrate to you that Malcolm had balls ?

2. Labor's NG policy shows that they have some economic balls, I haven't heard much from the other side on this than pander to their natural electorate.


----------



## sptrawler (5 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> 1. What would demonstrate to you that Malcolm had balls ?




Actually laying down a workable plan, to show how a budget surplus can be achieved. Also a fundamental framework to achieving a sustainable welfare/tax system.
It isn't as though the party hasn't got enough "white paper", to come up with something sensible. The only explanation can be that all options are unpalatable, therefore the limp safe choice, appears to be Malcolms prefered option.IMO




SirRumpole said:


> 2. Labor's NG policy shows that they have some economic balls, I haven't heard much from the other side on this than pander to their natural electorate.




That NG plan, sounds like typical Labor shoot from the hip policy. IMO 
But as you say at least they are saying something, be it right or wrong. 
Abbott might have been unpopular, but I think he would have been a lot more decisive than Turnbull, he looks like a bunny caught in the headlights.


----------



## sptrawler (5 April 2016)

drsmith said:


> I think the idea was intended to fail at this point (not enough detail) *and show the states as not wanting to take responsibility for the funding required for the services they provide*. That political capital is now in the bank for the federal government to use in future negotiations with the states. The short term political optics though didn't look good which is interesting in itself in the lead up to a federal election.
> 
> We can talk about reforming the tax base but if that's to plug cost shortfalls from areas of the budget growing out of proportion with GDP, you reach a point where those options run out but the fundamental problem remains leaving no options but to then increase tax rates. At some point, growing expenditure has to be addressed and it would be better addressed sooner rather than later and directing tax base measures to lower marginal rates in my view.



My Bolds.

I think it is typical of the standard of politics, when we get the Victorian premier on the news, bagging the idea the States should be responsible for funding their decisions.
It would have been interesting, if he had to increase State taxes to fund his $1billion contract cancellation, of the East West link.


----------



## Tisme (6 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> My Bolds.
> 
> I think it is typical of the standard of politics, when we get the Victorian premier on the news, bagging the idea the States should be responsible for funding their decisions.
> It would have been interesting, if he had to increase State taxes to fund his $1billion contract cancellation, of the East West link.




Wasn't it ~$340M fro works to date? Then they set up a line of credit via bonds with the consortium costing $80M to proceed with the alternative rail project. Apparently the original project was unfunded as it turned out and was a road to nowhere (which is fairly usual for Australian infrastructure).

I seem to recall visiting WA a few time to see the Great Easern Highway near the Airport getting ripped up, remade, ripped up. remade by the current Csars?


----------



## Knobby22 (6 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Wasn't it ~$340M fro works to date? Then they set up a line of credit via bonds with the consortium costing $80M to proceed with the alternative rail project. Apparently the original project was unfunded as it turned out and was a road to nowhere (which is fairly usual for Australian infrastructure).




Yea, that was the spin. Unfortunately $1.1 bil was the reality that came out later through the auditor general. A dreadful waste of money for a road that will need to be built one day. it is needed because all the traffic from the Western Suburbs has to go over the already overloaded West Gate Bridge.

The new government has done a deal with Transurban to build a second bridge but link it into the Bolte Bridge creating massive toll payments and a new gridlock point between Flemington Road and the Eastern freeway that will still need at least part of the original road built. Needless to say I now own Transurban shares. 

Sometimes democracy doesn't work. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-09/auditor-general-reports-on-east-west-link-costs/7012618


----------



## Tisme (6 April 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Yea, that was the spin. Unfortunately $1.1 bil was the reality that came out later through the auditor general. A dreadful waste of money for a road that will need to be built one day. it is needed because all the traffic from the Western Suburbs has to go over the already overloaded West Gate Bridge.
> 
> The new government has done a deal with Transurban to build a second bridge but link it into the Bolte Bridge creating massive toll payments and a new gridlock point between Flemington Road and the Eastern freeway that will still need at least part of the original road built. Needless to say I now own Transurban shares.
> 
> ...




Thanks for that... and $22.8bn WTF !!!


----------



## sptrawler (6 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Thanks for that... and $22.8bn WTF !!!




Well, how much do you think it will cost, when it has to be done?

It all sounds great, putting a cross CBD train link in, for the voting public. 
But it does sod all, to help trucks stuck in traffic jams, how much do you think that costs the economy?
But as usual, that doesn't bother Labor, who cares as long as they are splashing money on feel good programmes.


----------



## sptrawler (6 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> I seem to recall visiting WA a few time to see the Great Easern Highway near the Airport getting ripped up, remade, ripped up. remade by the current Csars?




Actually the road works around Perth airport have made an amazing difference. I only use those roads when going on holidays, but the recent holiday to Tassie cost $10 less for a taxi each way, than it was a year ago.

When you consider the number of FIFO workers using it every other week, it is a monumental improvement. 
But that really doesn't matter does it? the media and Labor don't mention it.


----------



## Tisme (7 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> 1. What would demonstrate to you that Malcolm had balls ?




Even back in the day you've had a great hope for this fella. It must be exasperating waiting for him to come to the crease. 

I spotted him as an accidental tourist way back in the day when he surfaced as Ozemail's dotcom gambler.....no fricken idea what the workings of the internet were, just out to make a quick buck on the hysteria of the boom. Then they put him in charge of the biggest infrastructure backbone since the railways expansion.... what did they think was going to happen.


----------



## Tisme (7 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Actually the road works around Perth airport have made an amazing difference. I only use those roads when going on holidays, but the recent holiday to Tassie cost $10 less for a taxi each way, than it was a year ago.
> 
> When you consider the number of FIFO workers using it every other week, it is a monumental improvement.
> But that really doesn't matter does it? the media and Labor don't mention it.




I did get used to finding the access road to my digs after a few trips, but it was a moving feast. The various business' were not at all happy with the process, who I would suspect are more Liberal party leaning....maybe not .... I'm not really interested in WA party politics being that West Australians tend to argue at the minor differences between both majors and which one fits better the frontier patriotism and isolationism that dominates the state.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Even back in the day you've had a great hope for this fella. It must be exasperating waiting for him to come to the crease.
> 
> I spotted him as an accidental tourist way back in the day when he surfaced as Ozemail's dotcom gambler.....no fricken idea what the workings of the internet were, just out to make a quick buck on the hysteria of the boom. Then they put him in charge of the biggest infrastructure backbone since the railways expansion.... what did they think was going to happen.




You don't accumulate as much bucks as he has without some nous, but as you say maybe a lot of that was luck.

I think he may well win the next election, again more by luck than by good policies, but may be constrained by a hung Parliament. The more things go on the way they are the more I think the people won't trust him and won't give him a Senate majority.

So it may well be game as usual after the election, can't get any traction and with Morrison breathing down his neck.

It may be worth voting Labor just to avoid that horrifying circumstance.


----------



## Tisme (7 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You don't accumulate as much bucks as he has without some nous, but as you say maybe a lot of that was luck.
> 
> I think he may well win the next election, again more by luck than by good policies, but may be constrained by a hung Parliament. The more things go on the way they are the more I think the people won't trust him and won't give him a Senate majority.
> 
> ...




It will be the DLP by another name within the ranks that will cripple his stewardship. He's a runaway Catholic and the LNP Catholics (read far right) don't like a loner.


----------



## Tink (9 April 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Yea, that was the spin. Unfortunately $1.1 bil was the reality that came out later through the auditor general. A dreadful waste of money for a road that will need to be built one day. it is needed because all the traffic from the Western Suburbs has to go over the already overloaded West Gate Bridge.
> 
> The new government has done a deal with Transurban to build a second bridge but link it into the Bolte Bridge creating massive toll payments and a new gridlock point between Flemington Road and the Eastern freeway that will still need at least part of the original road built. Needless to say I now own Transurban shares.
> 
> ...




Agree, Knobby, 

$1.1 billion of taxpayers money down the drain, for a freeway that has been recommended, and will probably be built in the future.
The contract that wasn't worth the paper it was written on, and wasn't going to cost us anything from this incompetent fool we have as a Premier (including the Greens).

---------------------------------
East West Link: Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull keeps project alive

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/e...bull-keeps-project-alive-20160407-go1ay7.html

----------------------------------

As for Daniel Andrews violence commission -
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30643

I can see it comes with their territory -
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/p...rty-dinner-20160408-go28ws.html#ixzz45E8x45ae

Smashing windows, trashing peoples offices etc.

_Chaos in Australian Education
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25851&page=5_


----------



## explod (9 April 2016)

What a load of rubbish in these later posts. 

The east/west link was merely going to feed into already choked freeways.  Huge further sums would be needed to clear it to the three major routes westwards. 

Anyone with half a brain,  if they take a good look at the map of Melbourne,  will see that the completion of the outer ring road into the south eastern freeway would cut the through traffic by 75%. 

Oh and notice the libs promise to future public transport less than 1%,  gotta be joking


----------



## Logique (18 April 2016)

Music to the ears of the old campaigner in New England. Sniffing out the balance of power.

We're going to see what the cross bench Senators are made of during the next 3 weeks.



> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/voters-expected-more-poll-20160417-go8b73.html
> *Fairfax-Ipsos poll points to knife-edge election between Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten* - April 18, 2016 - By: Mark Kenny
> 
> The Turnbull government's strong lead over the opposition has evaporated just as it enters a risky three-week special sitting of Parliament, attempts to secure an unlikely political bounce from a tight budget, and tries to justify an early election on July 2.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 April 2016)

Free Trade with China eh ?

Yeah right.

How China puts non tariff barriers on imports.

SA fruit producers struggle with costs of meeting Chinese import standards

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-18/citrus-farmers-struggle-with-chinese-import-standards/7335292


----------



## Tisme (19 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You don't accumulate as much bucks as he has without some nous,




and you don't make millions from govt labour placement subsidies without knowing what the govt is upto, like one Mrs Rudd did. 

or when it comes to it, where the next govt spend on greenfield suburban infrastructure is, like a certain Nationals adviser to Joe Peterson did way before becoming a Senator in today's sitting


----------



## sydboy007 (20 April 2016)




----------



## Logique (24 April 2016)

The Turnbull government seems bound and determined to give handouts to the middle class. Their instincts are _so_ regressive.  But a reduced tax take is a cost has to be paid for, somehow.   

A few months ago they scoffed at the idea of just adjusting the bracket thresholds. Now it's back as _their_ idea.



> *Malcolm Turnbull's government is sending more mixed messages on tax* - April 23, 2016
> SMH: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ges-on-tax-20160423-godfbf.html#ixzz46h1JMZx2
> 
> The Turnbull government is sending more mixed signals on tax, refusing to publicly confirm reports the budget will include middle class income tax cuts that appeared to be off the table just a few weeks ago.
> ...


----------



## Logique (24 April 2016)

What Barry Cassidy and the team on_ Insiders_ _didn't_ show you this morning. 

Watch from 0:55, as Cathy McGowan, Independent for Indi, circles Sophie Mirabella.

It's infantile, and _creepy_.

[video=youtube_share;Kn5azQOxvHw]http://youtu.be/Kn5azQOxvHw[/video]


----------



## drsmith (24 April 2016)

Adjusting tax bracket thresholds to take into account bracket creep does not necessarily represent a reduced tax take relative to the income that's being taxed. Not taking into account bracket creep however does increase the proportion of tax relative to that income.

On the broader tax discussion, other income items such as reform to negative gearing and CGT would have greater merit if the proceeds were used to reduce marginal income tax rates rather than increase the size of government.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 April 2016)

drsmith said:


> Adjusting tax bracket thresholds to take into account bracket creep does not necessarily represent a reduced tax take relative to the income that's being taxed. Not taking into account bracket creep however does increase the proportion of tax relative to that income.
> 
> On the broader tax discussion, other income items such as reform to negative gearing and CGT would have greater merit if the proceeds were used to reduce marginal income tax rates rather than increase the size of government.




Why are you assuming Labor will increase the size of government ?


----------



## drsmith (24 April 2016)

Logique said:


> What Barry Cassidy and the team on_ Insiders_ _didn't_ show you this morning.



I saw that myself and thought Sophie handled it well putting Cathy in her place. That though overall I suspect would have been a low quality debate featuring those two low quality candidates.


----------



## drsmith (24 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Why are you assuming Labor will increase the size of government ?



They're constantly banging on about the government scaling back some of Labor's unfunded spending programs from their previous term in office.

Perhaps Labor will backflip on some of that as election day nears. That remains to be seen.


----------



## Logique (24 April 2016)

drsmith said:


> Adjusting tax bracket thresholds to take into account bracket creep does not necessarily represent a reduced tax take relative to the income that's being taxed...



It does if you adjust the bracket thresholds upwards. Otherwise Labor's Tony Burke and I must both be wrong.


----------



## drsmith (24 April 2016)

Logique said:


> It does if you adjust the bracket thresholds upwards. Otherwise Labor's Tony Burke and I must both be wrong.



Bracket creep increases the proportion of tax relative to the underlying income. This is a simple mathematical consequence of rising individual incomes within a progressive tax framework. The individual's average tax rate rises as his or her pre tax income rises.


----------



## Tisme (26 April 2016)

So the LNP boys and girls thought they had fear trigger bogeyman with the negative gearing issue and the ALP's policy to discontinue it for new investments, but then the Graton Institute, with its prestigious affiliates, comes out and pooh poohs the LNP masterplan to do nothing.

There must be some really persuasive puppeteers in the Liberal party if they can turn Malcolm's head and manipulate his lips so easily on so many of his core pursuits ........

https://grattan.edu.au/report/hot-property/


----------



## SirRumpole (26 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> So the LNP boys and girls thought they had fear trigger bogeyman with the negative gearing issue and the ALP's policy to discontinue it for new investments, but then the Graton Institute, with its prestigious affiliates, comes out and pooh poohs the LNP masterplan to do nothing.
> 
> There must be some really persuasive puppeteers in the Liberal party if they can turn Malcolm's head and manipulate his lips so easily on so many of his core pursuits ........
> 
> https://grattan.edu.au/report/hot-property/




It's obvious that the Libs are pandering to their supporters, the mum and dad investors in Manly and Roseville, not the mum and dad first home buyers in Mt Druitt or Bankstown (translate that to the requisite Liberal and Labor electorates in other States).


----------



## moXJO (26 April 2016)

Yes, I  for one applaud labors effort to tax everything and anything in thought bubble style policy.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 April 2016)

moXJO said:


> Yes, I  for one applaud labors effort to tax everything and anything in thought bubble style policy.




You would be happy with the Libs increasing taxes on cigarettes and high income earners superannuation in that case ?


----------



## Tisme (26 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> It's obvious that the Libs are pandering to their supporters, the mum and dad investors in Manly and Roseville, not the mum and dad first home buyers in Mt Druitt or Bankstown (translate that to the requisite Liberal and Labor electorates in other States).




Yeah well I posted the actual demographics a few months back, but Andrew Bolt was not consulted on my homework, so I got an "F".

The deterioration in the calibre of politics, particularly the sophistry that is swallowed by the fawning party fans beggers belief...until you realise this was all predicted by Morel, Galton, Shockley and Darwin himself. We are dumber than we were a century ago, we have lower morality than a century ago, we are more perverse then a century ago and dysgenics is to blame. 

300 years ago the life expectancy for the important classes in Europe, was 30 years and the low classes 20 years, so the poorly talented and tested didn't have a chance to out breed, per capita, the middle class. Now the middle class think they are middle class when they are actually not and their compatriots on the same rung, but classified lower class out number the true middle class. So it's no wonder dumbarse poltics is attractive to dumbarse voters.


----------



## moXJO (26 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You would be happy with the Libs increasing taxes on cigarettes and high income earners superannuation in that case ?




No. I would be happy with tax reform, both sides are too gutless. At least scomo admitted as much.
There are only so many fees, taxes and bill rises the public can handle. Just adding taxes with negative flow on effects won't cut it.


----------



## sptrawler (26 April 2016)

I think Malcolm needs to readjust his stance on negative gearing, he may be worried that changing it will cause more problems than it solves, but to do nothing will cost him a huge backlash at the voting booth.

IMO Labors idea is dumb, as usual, a complete slowdown in housing at this point, would be fiscal suicide.

However a limit to how much can be claimed, would be a sensible outcome, simailar idea to how much can be salary sacrificed into super.IMO


----------



## drsmith (26 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I think Malcolm needs to readjust his stance on negative gearing, he may be worried that changing it will cause more problems than it solves, but to do nothing will cost him a huge backlash at the voting booth.
> 
> IMO Labors idea is dumb, as usual, a complete slowdown in housing at this point, would be fiscal suicide.
> 
> However a limit to how much can be claimed, would be a sensible outcome, simailar idea to how much can be salary sacrificed into super.IMO



The die is cast now, at least for this election. Politics has got in the way of rational policy from both sides.

The Grattan Institute wasn't too keen on a cap but rather opting for a transitional scale back over 10 years. This presumably would be in the form of a decreasing proportion of losses that could be claimed against wage income over time.


----------



## sptrawler (26 April 2016)

drsmith said:


> The die is cast now, at least for this election. Politics has got in the way of rational policy from both sides.
> 
> The Grattan Institute wasn't too keen on a cap but rather opting for a transitional scale back over 10 years. This presumably would be in the form of a decreasing proportion of losses that could be claimed against wage income over time.




The problem is, it is a very popular misconception, they will be wedged by it. IMO

Unbelievable miscalculation by Liberal, change leader on the basis that they need a decisive direction, then fall into the no change needed mantra.

Very confusing for the electorate, Labor are playing to the Liberals budget crisis cries, Liberal are now playing the crisis down.

Who the hell is organising the Liberals?  
They had better get their $hit together, you can't say there is a budget crisis, then suggest nothing be done about it.

Jeez this could be the worst election campaign in living history.

Don't get me wrong, I believe that a sudden contraction of housing activity and construction , would cause us to go into recession. 
However people must see that excesses are being reeled in.


----------



## noco (26 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> The problem is, it is a very popular misconception, they will be wedged by it. IMO
> 
> Unbelievable miscalculation by Liberal, change leader on the basis that they need a decisive direction, then fall into the no change needed mantra.
> 
> ...




There is an old saying..."Don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes".


----------



## sptrawler (26 April 2016)

noco said:


> There is an old saying..."Don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes".




I certainly hope you're right, or it will be to late.

It will be black eyes all round.

I don't think Turnbull is that stupid.


----------



## noco (26 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I certainly hope you're right, or it will be to late.
> 
> It will be black eyes all round.
> 
> I don't think Turnbull is that stupid.




I think he has been holding back until the budget and the election.

He certainly won over the South Australians today.

There is bound to be many sweetners in the budget.


----------



## Logique (27 April 2016)

noco said:


> I think he has been holding back until the budget and the election.
> 
> He certainly won over the South Australians today....



But at what cost Noco. Expensive submarines, and a very miffed Pacific neighbour in Japan.


----------



## Tisme (27 April 2016)

Logique said:


> But at what cost Noco. Expensive submarines, and a very miffed Pacific neighbour in Japan.





If we are such a clever country, why are we having to buy imported product? What is the population of Sweden, for example, it has a car industry, a fighter planes industry, submarine manufacturing, missiles, etc. I blame Bill Shorten


----------



## SirRumpole (27 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I think Malcolm needs to readjust his stance on negative gearing, he may be worried that changing it will cause more problems than it solves, but to do nothing will cost him a huge backlash at the voting booth.
> 
> IMO Labors idea is dumb, as usual, a complete slowdown in housing at this point, would be fiscal suicide.
> 
> However a limit to how much can be claimed, would be a sensible outcome, simailar idea to how much can be salary sacrificed into super.IMO




How can you justify the term "complete slowdown" in the housing market ?

There are thousands of potential owner occupiers who will re-enter the market when they know that they have a chance of success,  they didn't when investors dominated the sector.

House prices may fall initially, but they will recover as the first home buyers start bidding again.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> If we are such a clever country, why are we having to buy imported product? What is the population of Sweden, for example, it has a car industry, a fighter planes industry, submarine manufacturing, missiles, etc. I blame Bill Shorten




And higher taxes but the Swedes don't seem to mind that, they have high tech jobs and high living standards.


----------



## noco (27 April 2016)

Logique said:


> But at what cost Noco. Expensive submarines, and a very miffed Pacific neighbour in Japan.




Now how could anyone expect you Laborites to be happy.....I would have been disappointed if one of you had not been critical of the Liberal Government.....If they been solely built in Japan you would really had something to whinge about.


----------



## Tisme (27 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> And higher taxes but the Swedes don't seem to mind that, they have high tech jobs and high living standards.




But France is higher again and we just gave them $50bn to defend our national treasures = coal pits, powdered milk and iron ore.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> But France is higher again and we just gave them $50bn to defend our national treasures = coal pits, powdered milk and iron ore.




I get what you are saying and it seems to me that we should have learned lessons from the Collins and we should be in a position to design a sub that fixes those faults.

Having other countries, no matter how friendly knowing our capabilities doesn't seem good for national security, but I guess that's where cost entered into the equation.


----------



## Tisme (27 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I get what you are saying and it seems to me that we should have learned lessons from the Collins and we should be in a position to design a sub that fixes those faults.
> 
> Having other countries, no matter how friendly knowing our capabilities doesn't seem good for national security, but I guess that's where cost entered into the equation.




I think it's the cultural cringe in play and lack of industry vision of the LNP... history shows they have rarely been a nurseryman for secondary or tertiary value add, much preferring the sheep's back and selling pig iron to the enemy that was already committing unspeakable atrocities on its neighbours in 1938. I blame Bill Shorten and the wharfies for stopping that lucrative trade.

I can't readily think of one tangible secondary industry that the LNP has fostered; they are good at the closing doors of ALP inspired factories ....anyone got a clue? Of course there is that election ad showing a 3d printer startup coy that wasn't funded by the innovation fund that the ad is promoting.


----------



## Tisme (27 April 2016)

Paul Keating must be so proud that a "big red bunger" would be so protective of Paul's invention:

mind you I am having trouble with the arithmetic on this one 



> The prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, has said that it is “beside the point” that high income earners tend to earn the largest capital gains from property and labelled Labor’s negative policy “unjust”.
> 
> Turnbull has also used a blog post to criticise the Grattan Institute’s new report on negative gearing, saying it is “littered with factually incorrect statements” and its economic analysis “leaves a lot to be desired”.
> 
> ...




It's all Billy Shorten's fault and pink batts of course.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Paul Keating must be so proud that a "big red bunger" would be so protective of Paul's invention:
> 
> mind you I am having trouble with the arithmetic on this one
> 
> ...




Turnbull or Morrison said on tv that negative gearing has been in our system since 1915. Who was in then I wonder ? Billy Hughes maybe.

Anyway, the whole concept is ludicrous to me. Why should taxpayers subsidise loss making investments ? It's crazy.


----------



## luutzu (27 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> But France is higher again and we just gave them $50bn to defend our national treasures = coal pits, powdered milk and iron ore.




Them $50B doesn't come with the French Foreign Legion. After a nother $10B in variations and bailout, they might throw in a few hours of training to us miners.

Don't we have a lot of coastlines to protect? A country this big with that much water to guard against illegals could do with some in-house manufacturing.


----------



## luutzu (27 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Turnbull or Morrison said on tv that negative gearing has been in our system since 1915. Who was in then I wonder ? Billy Hughes maybe.
> 
> Anyway, the whole concept is ludicrous to me. Why should taxpayers subsidise loss making investments ? It's crazy.




When these properties are sold, if they've been held for over 12 months they get that capital gains tax concession too right?

woohoo...

It's what we'd called rewarding the rich so that the people would work hard to get rich. It hasn't worked out so well but they have to keep trying harder, and harder, each year to show how the rich will be favoured and that we lazy plebs ought to get off our behind and get rich too.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 April 2016)

luutzu said:


> When these properties are sold, if they've been held for over 12 months they get that capital gains tax concession too right?
> 
> woohoo...
> 
> It's what we'd called rewarding the rich so that the people would work hard to get rich. It hasn't worked out so well but they have to keep trying harder, and harder, each year to show how the rich will be favoured and that we lazy plebs ought to get off our behind and get rich too.




Indeed, which is why we have a disparity of wealth distribution in this country.


----------



## luutzu (27 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Indeed, which is why we have a disparity of wealth distribution in this country.




So this is what welfare for the rich looks like.

No wonder people I know with one house aren't happy with just having one. All of them seem to have two or three. 

And here I am just saving up and paying my share of income tax like an idiot.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 April 2016)

luutzu said:


> So this is what welfare for the rich looks like.
> 
> No wonder people I know with one house aren't happy with just having one. All of them seem to have two or three.
> 
> And here I am just saving up and paying my share of income tax like an idiot.




You have a vote at the next election ?


----------



## Tisme (27 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Turnbull or Morrison said on tv that negative gearing has been in our system since 1915. Who was in then I wonder ? Billy Hughes maybe.
> 
> Anyway, the whole concept is ludicrous to me. Why should taxpayers subsidise loss making investments ? It's crazy.





Well if Billy Hughes was around in ~January 1985 I guess it must have been him....I mean why would Morrison and Turnbull bare face lie to their half wit fawning fans 

There was the 1936 Taxation Assessment act, but that's not what is play here. As I recall Keating wanted to change his negative gearing to stop the stampede of profiteers, but the same BS argument the LNP are using now was used back then about stag inflated rents to transition to positive gearing. My own accountant had 23 properties back in the early 90's that was really a house of cards.... and in the end he disposed of them and could have made more net money working overtime for a while. 

I had some and couldn't turn a buck unless I lied about income and depreciation of already exhausted/scrap assets so I sold up rather than behave criminally. I'm sure slum lords do quite well.


----------



## luutzu (27 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You have a vote at the next election ?




Yea, I'll turn up and tick a couple boxes. Doesn't seem to work out though, but will save some $20 bucks for it.

Guess I better stick with trying to get rich myself. Dam it! Their plan to encourage hardwork and ambition does work!


----------



## overhang (27 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I think Malcolm needs to readjust his stance on negative gearing, he may be worried that changing it will cause more problems than it solves, but to do nothing will cost him a huge backlash at the voting booth.
> 
> IMO Labors idea is dumb, as usual, a complete slowdown in housing at this point, would be fiscal suicide.
> 
> However a limit to how much can be claimed, would be a sensible outcome, simailar idea to how much can be salary sacrificed into super.IMO




I disagree that Labors proposal will result in a slowdown of the housing market.  The HIA argued the same thing when the first home buyers grant was removed from established homes and it didn't result in a slowdown.  Labors plan encourages investors to invest in new dwellings which provides a boost to much needed housing supply which is what negative gearing all though intended has failed to do as 90% of homes that are negatively geared are existing dwellings.  When NG was abolished in 85 rents only increased in Sydney and Perth which had other contributing factors as the reason for the increase whilst the rest of the country stayed quite stagnant. There is no evidence that NG will cause a substantial slowdown in the housing market.


----------



## CanOz (27 April 2016)

The Turnbull Government has made a stupid mistake if they go against the recommendations of the Grattin Institute....Doesn't Turnbulls's wife sit on a board there?


----------



## Knobby22 (27 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> The Turnbull Government has made a stupid mistake if they go against the recommendations of the Grattin Institute....Doesn't Turnbulls's wife sit on a board there?




They have the right wing faction forcing him to do this.


----------



## drsmith (27 April 2016)

Not encouraging,

http://www.essentialvision.com.au/category/essentialreport


----------



## MrBurns (27 April 2016)

Turnbulls arrogant stand on negative gearing means I'll HAVE to vote for Shorten to give mine and everyones kids a chance to buy a home.

Supercilious grin on his face standing in front of his $50m mansion means he'll likely lose the unlosable election.


----------



## CanOz (27 April 2016)

MrBurns said:


> Turnbulls arrogant stand on negative gearing means I'll HAVE to vote for Shorten to give mine and everyones kids a chance to buy a home.
> 
> Supercilious grin on his face standing in front of his $50m mansion means he'll likely lose the unlosable election.




Housing prices need to come down on their own, supply. Although the Institures report only predicted a 2% drop in housing prices, i don't think they can anticipate how much supply might hit the market. Meddling in markets doesn't usually work out to well, for anyone. If a drop in house prices causes a panic, valuations could get hit, triggering defaults, etc. until you have contagion....then it will be seen as a stupid decision, as we run the banks.


----------



## MrBurns (27 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> Housing prices need to come down on their own, supply. Although the Institures report only predicted a 2% drop in housing prices, i don't think they can anticipate how much supply might hit the market. Meddling in markets doesn't usually work out to well, for anyone. If a drop in house prices causes a panic, valuations could get hit, triggering defaults, etc. until you have contagion....then it will be seen as a stupid decision, as we run the banks.





2% so what.....I saw prices drop 30% in the late 80's everyone survived, except a few highly geared businesses.

As if negative gearing isn't meddling in the housing market already.

Valuations will get hit, the banks will close in on some but not if they can still pay their debts.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 April 2016)

drsmith said:


> Not encouraging,
> 
> http://www.essentialvision.com.au/category/essentialreport




Maybe not for some.


----------



## CanOz (27 April 2016)

MrBurns said:


> 2% so what.....I saw prices drop 30% in the late 80's everyone survived, except a few highly geared businesses.
> 
> As if negative gearing isn't meddling in the housing market already.
> 
> Valuations will get hit, the banks will close in on some but not if they can still pay their debts.




hmmm yeah but did the banks have stress on their books already from oil and mining companies and their housing projects ??



Agree 2% is nothing, my point is, how can they forecast a 2% drop?


----------



## MrBurns (27 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> hmmm yeah but did the banks have stress on their books already from oil and mining companies and their housing projects ??
> 
> Agree 2% is nothing, my point is, how can they forecast a 2% drop?




Don't know how they arrived at that figure.

As far as I can see it will increase demand for new properties, units, of which there is a huge looming oversupply anyway.

I cant see a downside to be honest, existing properties wont be effected.

The banks ? Suffer a little. Profits might fall but they wont go broke.


----------



## Knobby22 (27 April 2016)

Even Hockey said we should do something about it but unfortunately after he had quit.

If I was Turnbull I would keep negative gearing but make it claimable only against the investment, not your wage. This would bring it in line with the rest of the world and stop the distortion. I do think Labor has gone too far on this one.


----------



## MrBurns (27 April 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Even Hockey said we should do something about it but unfortunately after he had quit.
> 
> If I was Turnbull I would keep negative gearing but make it claimable only against the investment, not your wage. This would bring it in line with the rest of the world and stop the distortion. I do think Labor has gone too far on this one.




Ideally negative gearing should only be allowed on commercial and industrial premises, business premises and perhaps single blocks of 4 residential units or more.

Too late for common sense now.

I think the ALP idea is ok for starters the problem is if they win will they do a backflip on it ?

I was very happy when Turnbull took over, people said "no no look what happened last time", they were right, he just doesn't get it.


----------



## CanOz (27 April 2016)

MrBurns said:


> Ideally negative gearing should only be allowed on commercial and industrial premises, business premises and perhaps single blocks of 4 residential units or more.
> 
> Too late for common sense now.
> 
> ...




he's just as bad as Abbot, no leadership...someone else is pulling the strings


----------



## moXJO (27 April 2016)

Being at the top of a property cycle will see houses fall, not by meddling with negative gearing. Didn't we hit deflation?

I wouldn't mind labors proposal going through so I can hike rents.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 April 2016)

moXJO said:


> Being at the top of a property cycle will see houses fall, not by meddling with negative gearing. Didn't we hit deflation?
> 
> I wouldn't mind labors proposal going through so I can hike rents.




As soon as owner occupiers can afford their own homes they won't be paying your crummy rents and you'll be left with the dregs and no-hopers.


----------



## MrBurns (27 April 2016)

4 Corners Monday, story on negative gearing and those who are locked out of the market.

Looking forward to it.

https://www.facebook.com/abc4corners/


----------



## SirRumpole (27 April 2016)

Things like this may well lose the election for the Libs

*Guess whose electorate negatively gears the most...*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-27/grudnoff-facts-about-negative-gearing/7362012


----------



## Tisme (27 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Things like this may well lose the election for the Libs
> 
> *Guess whose electorate negatively gears the most...*
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-27/grudnoff-facts-about-negative-gearing/7362012




You know that the old adage about the Liberal Party policy? In a nutshell its core activity is to oppose whatever Labor comes up with.... true....so it should be no surprise they are opposing the Bill Shorten Party....and no surprise that Bill threw this one in the mix some time ago as bait that Malcolm eventually took; hook, line and sinker.


----------



## Tisme (27 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Things like this may well lose the election for the Libs
> 
> *Guess whose electorate negatively gears the most...*
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-27/grudnoff-facts-about-negative-gearing/7362012




They were always going to find it hard to win the election once the electorate twigged to Abbott being more air than substance... that's why the leadership change.

Even now they are wheeling out the same old Abbott electioneering style grasping desperately to carbon tax bogies, off shore processing, a chicken in every negatively geared pot, no doubt the debt and deficit that has grown enormously under the guys who were going to reverse the trend as a matter of grave national importance...

I think this election could be a watershed for the Liberals where they rethink their agendas and maybe go back to the future of less gutter tactics and more Menzoid policy.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> I think this election could be a watershed for the Liberals where they rethink their agendas and maybe go back to the future of less gutter tactics and more Menzoid policy.




I guess it depends who is their leader after the election.

 If Turnbull wins with a large majority (very unlikely) he will have a mandate to mould the party to his views, if he just scrapes back, nothing much will change because he'll be continually under attack by the Right, and of course if he loses he'll be gone.

Menzies was more Left than the current string pullers, Turnbull is probably the modern Menzies but without Menzies' war time leader aura.


----------



## banco (27 April 2016)

moXJO said:


> Being at the top of a property cycle will see houses fall, not by meddling with negative gearing. Didn't we hit deflation?
> 
> I wouldn't mind labors proposal going through so I can hike rents.




Amazing the number of economically illiterate landlords who somehow think they can always pass increased costs on.  In any case Labor's negative gearing changes won't apply to properties that were purchased prior to 1 July 2017.


----------



## Tisme (27 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I guess it depends who is their leader after the election.
> 
> If Turnbull wins with a large majority (very unlikely) he will have a mandate to mould the party to his views, if he just scrapes back, nothing much will change because he'll be continually under attack by the Right, and of course if he loses he'll be gone.
> 
> Menzies was more Left than the current string pullers, Turnbull is probably the modern Menzies but without Menzies' war time leader aura.




Menzies wasn't our war time leader ... that was buck passed to Curtin.

Do you remember the end of days predictions my the LNP when Hawke/Keating pushed superannuation out to the masses? Now those CBus monies power development rather than the English gentry who got their nickers in a knot when Khemlami organised a petrodollar loan....shock horror.

It seems every modern cornerstone of our economy has had to go through the Murdoch Liberal Party trial by fire because it has roots in the Labor Party. Even Costello tried to take credit for the financial foundations laid down by Keating.

It must be galling for rusted on LNP voters to admit the ALP has done some good things and it must be galling for ALP tragics to never see their heros get credit for stuff. I know it galling for me to see grownups behave like petulant children and get paid a motza of taxpayer monies for doing so. 

If I can just convince Bill to sack Tanya, Penny, himself and any of the other social engineers in his party I might preference the ALP behind whatever crackpot is running in my patch


----------



## SirRumpole (27 April 2016)

Tisme said:


> Menzies wasn't our war time leader ... that was buck passed to Curtin.




He was for a while , but yes I stand corrected.



> If I can just convince Bill to sack Tanya, Penny, himself and any of the other social engineers in his party I might preference the ALP behind whatever crackpot is running in my patch




Penny and Tanya are certainly detriments to Labor as is that idiot Conroy. I think it will be people like Mark Butler and Jason Clare and possibly Chris Bowen that Labor will prosper under.

They may have to serve apprenticeships under Blinky Bill though.


----------



## sptrawler (27 April 2016)

MrBurns said:


> I was very happy when Turnbull took over, people said "no no look what happened last time", they were right, he just doesn't get it.




Abbott was unpopular but you knew where he stood.

Turnbull doesn't know where he stands, therefore the indecision. He thinks he is a great politician, but as happened last time, he is caught in the headlights again.

Why do you think Fairfax were pushing for Turnbull, he loves to be on the telly, great for them.

The guy just wants to be loved.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Abbott was unpopular but you knew where he stood.
> 
> Turnbull doesn't know where he stands, therefore the indecision. He thinks he is a great politician, but as happened last time, he is caught in the headlights again.
> 
> ...




I'm getting tired of listening to both Turnbull and Shorten ramble on, trying to get as many words out as they can in the shortest time. It's getting tiresome and I usually turn them off. Same with Barnaby Joyce who is a raving idiot. 

Scott Morrison is just giving tirades these days.

I was impressed with Marise Payne. She answers questions calmly without trying to give a Boyer lecture. If only a few others did the same.


----------



## Tisme (27 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I'm getting tired of listening to both Turnbull and Shorten ramble on, trying to get as many words out as they can in the shortest time. It's getting tiresome and I usually turn them off. Same with Barnaby Joyce who is a raving idiot.
> 
> Scott Morrison is just giving tirades these days.
> 
> I was impressed with Marise Payne. She answers questions calmly without trying to give a Boyer lecture. If only a few others did the same.




Passionate shouters, passive doers.


----------



## drsmith (27 April 2016)

CanOz said:


> he's just as bad as Abbot, no leadership...someone else is pulling the strings



A legacy of the coup perhaps.


----------



## sptrawler (27 April 2016)

drsmith said:


> A legacy of the coup perhaps.




That's possible doc, but unless the budget gives a sense of direction and purpose, they will lose a lot of traction.IMO


----------



## drsmith (27 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> That's possible doc, but unless the budget gives a sense of direction and purpose, they will lose a lot of traction.IMO



Yes. The budget is now more critical than ever.


----------



## moXJO (27 April 2016)

banco said:


> Amazing the number of economically illiterate landlords who somehow think they can always pass increased costs on.  In any case Labor's negative gearing changes won't apply to properties that were purchased prior to 1 July 2017.




It's funnier when investing illiterate lefties get angry over property not dropping.
You think rents won't  be increased regardless to cover costs. 

 Perhaps you didn't witness the insulation debacle, ber, solar. Every scheme was ripped by those taking advantage.
In fact if you were quick enough to jump in and out,  you could make a lot of money during labors policy roll outs. 

Rents would start to move upwards as everyone moved in line -regardless of if you purchased prior or not.
Taking advantage is taking advantage. 

Negative gearing tinkering  won't be the savior of first home buyers like everyone seems to think.
Recession and deflation  will be. That's if Chinese and foreign investors stop investing. Goodluck  with that.

Liberals have every home owner in the country to make their pitch too. Also all those investors who may want to use property in the future. 
Libs just need to grab the narrative. Shouldn't be that bloody hard.


----------



## luutzu (27 April 2016)

moXJO said:


> It's funnier when investing illiterate lefties get angry over property not dropping.
> You think rents won't  be increased regardless to cover costs.
> 
> Perhaps you didn't witness the insulation debacle, ber, solar. Every scheme was ripped by those taking advantage.
> ...




I take it you go a few property?

Isn't it cool there are laws that treat everybody equally? Rich or poor, earning a million or a few grand, we all can get to pay zero income tax! 

But honestly though, why would anyone want to get into an investment that actually make them a lost? Could become a bad habit. And not all bad habits are covered by Big Brother.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 April 2016)

moXJO said:


> It's funnier when investing illiterate lefties get angry over property not dropping.
> You think rents won't  be increased regardless to cover costs.
> 
> Perhaps you didn't witness the insulation debacle, ber, solar. Every scheme was ripped by those taking advantage.
> ...




Maybe you don't understand Labor's proposal.

1. People with existing investments won't be affected.

2. You can still negative gear on new houses.

And anyway, why should it be the government's job to subsidise loss making investments ?

People here congratulated Tony Abbott on cutting assistance to car makers and they actually produced something and employed people, but those same people scream blue murder when their own peccadilloes are threatened.

If a free market ideology is important to some people then just remember it cuts both ways.


----------



## overhang (28 April 2016)

moXJO said:


> It's funnier when investing illiterate lefties get angry over property not dropping.
> You think rents won't  be increased regardless to cover costs.
> 
> Perhaps you didn't witness the insulation debacle, ber, solar. Every scheme was ripped by those taking advantage.
> ...




So it won't crash the housing market, then that's great we just found a way to save the budget 5 billion a year from ending this overly generous subsidy.  In the same way we make cuts to the ABC/CSIRO, changes to FTB part B.  And I could go on but these were all measures to save the bottom line, why is this one so difficult for the government.  Labors proposal will actually benefit the country, we will be billions better off annually and it will actually boost the construction industry.


----------



## moXJO (28 April 2016)

overhang said:


> So it won't crash the housing market, then that's great we just found a way to save the budget 5 billion a year from ending this overly generous subsidy.  In the same way we make cuts to the ABC/CSIRO, changes to FTB part B.  And I could go on but these were all measures to save the bottom line, why is this one so difficult for the government.  Labors proposal will actually benefit the country, we will be billions better off annually and it will actually boost the construction industry.




It won't crash the market alone. We are in the last throws of a boom, coupled with what was an under supply. Some areas are going to drop hard. Well placed houses won't.
Negative gearing is generally used in rising  markets,  you're only compounding losses in flat and falling markets. If people can positive gear on any drops in housing price they will simply switch.
The idea behind negative gearing was to add stock to public housing at a cheaper rate. All those "dregs" as rumpy put it need housing. The waiting list for public housing is years.
So if you are housing at the lower end and they are damaging your house then you can claim for repairs. So what happens in the future of no negative gearing?
Private hospitals, private schools, private transport are subsidized by the govt to make up the short fall. Negative gearing was meant to make up the short fall in public housing.


Construction will not get a boost that's a bs statement.
Maintenance companies will take a hit as landlords stop any loss making repairs.

I'm not interested in what labor claim it will do. They had 6 years of ruining everything they touched. I'm interested in the unintended consequences of what they do. That's the money shot.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 April 2016)

> Negative gearing was meant to make up the short fall in public housing.




You could build a lot of public housing with the savings made from scrapping negative gearing.


----------



## noco (28 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Maybe you don't understand Labor's proposal.
> 
> 1. People with existing investments won't be affected.
> 
> ...




Blame the Fabians......The useless Labor Party have no ideas.....2015 has gone and past with Labor's new ideas.


----------



## noco (28 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You could build a lot of public housing with the savings made from scrapping negative gearing.




That would be the LUG Party's ideology of central control.....This is Australia not China.


----------



## overhang (28 April 2016)

moXJO said:


> It won't crash the market alone. We are in the last throws of a boom, coupled with what was an under supply. Some areas are going to drop hard. Well placed houses won't.
> Negative gearing is generally used in rising  markets,  you're only compounding losses in flat and falling markets. If people can positive gear on any drops in housing price they will simply switch.
> The idea behind negative gearing was to add stock to public housing at a cheaper rate. All those "dregs" as rumpy put it need housing. The waiting list for public housing is years.
> So if you are housing at the lower end and they are damaging your house then you can claim for repairs. So what happens in the future of no negative gearing?
> ...




Negative gearing has failed miserably at increasing supply, it in conjunction with Howards CGT discount have only served to put house prices out of reach of first home buyers while investors increase a portfolio of real estate at the expense of the tax payer. The up to 5 billion a year would be better served to actually be spent on public housing an increase supply than keeping houses artificially inflated via concessions beyond the reach of a large proportion of the population. 

You will still be able to claim against repairs but just not against your income but against the capital gains if any. 

Of course it will increase construction, negative gearing is too good of a concession to pass up that investors will move to new dwellings.  Obviously the initial outlay will be higher but so will the rental income, the safety net of having no to little maintenance issues like you do with established homes.  With the rubbish volume builders serve up these days it's quite affordable to build new providing you don't want luxury's like caesar stone bench tops and eaves.


----------



## moXJO (28 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You could build a lot of public housing with the savings made from scrapping negative gearing.




It was the maintenance the govt didn't want to contend with.
 If they released a policy of building more public housing in step with abolishing negative gearing you might be adjusting for the social impact. That so called $5 billion in savings would just be wasted on public service pushing pens around.


----------



## MrBurns (28 April 2016)

Yes I know Shorten is a union hack and will stuff everything else up but if he can get the NG changes through it might be worth it.
I cant see Turnbull doing anything, he looks rather vacant really.


----------



## sptrawler (28 April 2016)

MrBurns said:


> Yes I know Shorten is a union hack and will stuff everything else up but if he can get the NG changes through it might be worth it.
> I cant see Turnbull doing anything, he looks rather vacant really.




The problem is with Shortens NG idea, it will lead to very few new houses being built, as the risk/ return for small investors will be too great IMO. 
Why would you build a new house to negative gear, firstly if you need to sell it within 5 years you will be up for GST on the build, also the CGT exemption being cut will add to the risk.
The reduction in investors buying existing housing, will bring the price down which will attract first home buyers, at the cost of new builds. This will then cause a flow on effect and downturn on the construction side.

I think it would be much better to just say, you can only offset loses up to a certain amount, this then stops excessive negative gearing. Yet doesn't discourage investment in housing, by the mums and dads, after all it is those that house the poor for the Government.

Shortens idea is like cracking a walnut with a sledgehammer, or like Woolies rolling out 100 Masters mega stores, before they have a working model.

But doing nothing, when you have been harping on about a budget deficit, isn't going to cut it .


----------



## Knobby22 (28 April 2016)

Brian McNamee (CSL's old genius CEO) attacked the idea of a general company tax cut. He said the money would be better spent targeting innovation and development within Australia. I agree. If we end up getting tax rises to super and its spent on tax cuts for big companies then this will be a big vote loser in my view.


----------



## MrBurns (28 April 2016)

sptrawler said:


> The problem is with Shortens NG idea, it will lead to very few new houses being built, as the risk/ return for small investors will be too great IMO.
> Why would you build a new house to negative gear, firstly if you need to sell it within 5 years you will be up for GST on the build, also the CGT exemption being cut will add to the risk.
> The reduction in investors buying existing housing, will bring the price down which will attract first home buyers, at the cost of new builds. This will then cause a flow on effect and downturn on the construction side.
> 
> ...




I see it playing out as follows - 

All the NG money will go into new units their sales will go through the roof that will suck up the oversupply and promote more building.

No one will build a new home to NG they'll just buy a unit or flat.


----------



## MrBurns (28 April 2016)

Whatever is done someone must address the widening chasm between the uber wealthy and the poor or there will be increasing social unrest.  

If the rich want a fair and safe society they had better be prepared to give up some of their wealth or put electric fences around their homes.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 April 2016)

Lessons from the Howard and Costello tax cuts

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-28/megalogenis-lessons-from-the-howard,-costello-tax-cuts/7364782


----------



## sptrawler (28 April 2016)

MrBurns said:


> I see it playing out as follows -
> 
> All the NG money will go into new units their sales will go through the roof that will suck up the oversupply and promote more building.
> 
> No one will build a new home to NG they'll just buy a unit or flat.




That may happen in the major cities, where there is an oversupply of of units and apartments, doesn't work too well outside of the major cities.


----------



## sptrawler (28 April 2016)

MrBurns said:


> Whatever is done someone must address the widening chasm between the uber wealthy and the poor or there will be increasing social unrest.
> 
> If the rich want a fair and safe society they had better be prepared to give up some of their wealth or put electric fences around their homes.




Like I said if negative gearing was limited to a certain amount, be that a percentage of your wage or a flat amount say $10,000 or $20,000, that would limit the size of debt being attributed to house purchases.
 Which in turn would bring down prices, as people couldn't take out uber loans to speculate, with the taxpayer funding the rent shortfall.

This would still make it sensible for people to still buy a bread and butter rental property, but should stop the rich from using it to up scale the Mcmansion with taxpayers money.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 April 2016)

Any comments about the fact that we appear to be heading into a "deflationary" period ?

Interest rates are so low they can hardly drop any further and yet it doesn't seem sufficient to stimulate the economy.

Consumer confidence and wage growth appears to be stalling so you can't say it's been a particularly successful time for the current government.

Or is it still all Labor's fault ?


----------



## Junior (28 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Any comments about the fact that we appear to be heading into a "deflationary" period ?
> 
> Interest rates are so low they can hardly drop any further and yet it doesn't seem sufficient to stimulate the economy.
> 
> ...




I find it funny that media commentary consistently talks about how the RBA has 'plenty of room to move'.  With RBA rate at 2% and a 50-year low I'm not convinced.  

Just because we're not at 0%...we aren't far off!  What if another banking/credit crisis hits?  We'll be down at 0% very quickly and then nowhere to go but negative.

The rest of the developed world has backed us into a corner, if we tried to 'normalise' rates at say 5%, the AUD would go through the roof.  The Fed are kidding themselves if they think they'll get back over 1% any-time soon, IMO.


----------



## noco (28 April 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Any comments about the fact that we appear to be heading into a "deflationary" period ?
> 
> Interest rates are so low they can hardly drop any further and yet it doesn't seem sufficient to stimulate the economy.
> 
> ...




Yes of cause it is the useless Labor's fault....You hit the nail on the head......They stuffed up the country 2007/2013 big time and we are still trying to recover...The economic wounds are so deep that major surgery was needed.....The country is still in ICU......It has needed a blood transfusion and lots of oxygen to bring it back to life again.......Only a Liberal Government has the know how to do it......The medicine needs to be strong and not too many like the medicine particularly those in the LUG Party.

Get well soon Australia.


----------



## CanOz (28 April 2016)

Junior said:


> I find it funny that media commentary consistently talks about how the RBA has 'plenty of room to move'.  With RBA rate at 2% and a 50-year low I'm not convinced.
> 
> Just because we're not at 0%...we aren't far off!  What if another banking/credit crisis hits?  We'll be down at 0% very quickly and then nowhere to go but negative.
> 
> The rest of the developed world has backed us into a corner, if we tried to 'normalise' rates at say 5%, the AUD would go through the roof.  The Fed are kidding themselves if they think they'll get back over 1% any-time soon, IMO.




We're 200 basis points off ZIRP. That's 8 cuts of 25 basis points. The economy according to the data (god forbid we actually use what we know) is still indicating that the economy is robust, however some of this has been on the back of resource pricing.

I can see them dropping rates and the bonds are rising after yesterdays data....


----------



## banco (28 April 2016)

moXJO said:


> It's funnier when investing illiterate lefties get angry over property not dropping.
> You think rents won't  be increased regardless to cover costs.
> 
> Perhaps you didn't witness the insulation debacle, ber, solar. Every scheme was ripped by those taking advantage.
> ...




If it's so easy to put up rents "regardless" why you haven't you already done it? By the way it's "throes" not "throws".


----------



## drsmith (28 April 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Brian McNamee (CSL's old genius CEO) attacked the idea of a general company tax cut. He said the money would be better spent targeting innovation and development within Australia. I agree. If we end up getting tax rises to super and its spent on tax cuts for big companies then this will be a big vote loser in my view.



I know a cut in the corporate tax rate has been raised but I too can't see it as being politically viable at the present time. 

One that has been revised again recently is a modest increase to the $80k income tax threshold funded by an increased productivity dividend within the public service.

Bringing the 30% super contribution tax rate down to $180k in an interesting one in that it will impact people with incomes under $180k to the extent that undeducted super contributions will be subject to the higher tax rate where (income + undeducted super contributions)  > $180k.


----------



## explod (28 April 2016)

banco said:


> If it's so easy to put up rents "regardless" why you haven't you already done it? By the way it's "throes" not "throws".




Actually in many outer areas of Melbourne and with the growing oversupply of units in inner areas rents are dropping in line with an increase in vacancy rates as growing living costs reductions in work hours and full time jobs are kicking.   You will see little of this in mainstream media as thier continued beat up is trying to stem this flow.


----------



## moXJO (28 April 2016)

banco said:


> If it's so easy to put up rents "regardless" why you haven't you already done it? By the way it's "throes" not "throws".




You know someone's $hitty when that start on spelling. 

 rents are up


----------



## Tisme (29 April 2016)




----------



## SirRumpole (29 April 2016)

Tisme said:


>





Well done Waleed.


----------



## Logique (30 April 2016)

This was really well done by Waleed. 

He exposed the Coalition's claims for what they are, a baseless scare campaign. House prices will be  just fine. There'll just be more owners living in them, i.e. Gen X, Gen Y and the Millennials. 

As opposed to investor owned places sitting empty, because it's more profitable to investor owners.

A policy whose time has come, the ALP finally got something right.


----------



## basilio (30 April 2016)

Logique said:


> This was really well done by Waleed.
> 
> He exposed the Coalition's claims for what they are, a baseless scare campaign. House prices will be  just fine. There'll just be more owners living in them, i.e. Gen X, Gen Y and the Millennials.
> 
> ...




That was a devastating take down by Waleed Ali. Negative gearing has gone out of control. The governments policy of not realising that and wanting it to continue as is at the expense of 80% of the people is going to be exposed badly.


----------



## qldfrog (30 April 2016)

basilio said:


> That was a devastating take down by Waleed Ali. Negative gearing has gone out of control. The governments policy of not realising that and wanting it to continue as is at the expense of 80% of the people is going to be exposed badly.




While I often have my hair rising when Waleed talk, especially cf illegal migrants, I have to say there is much truth there;
Even if it would really take a lot for me to vote Labour ever again (seems to be the way the LNP get votes: anyone who can remember/voted the last ALP in power turn into a lifelong non ALP voter; so not really a generational devide, more a memory one)
NG for new construction, reducing of CGT discount( as long as the inflation CPI can be counted in otherwise, it would be crazy to hold on any investment RE or anything else);
I also have to say that I own my own home, an industrial investment property and have owned , never using negative gearing as a matter of principle on real estate.So not a matter of jealousy, just because on the economic side, the fascination with RE in Australia is destroying this country.


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2016)

1) So now Manus Island has become a fiasco it's Kevin Rudd's (therefore Bill Shorten's) fault for not negotiating the agreement in perpetuity. Strange how the LNP (and half this discussion membership)  took credit for Kevin's work just a few years ago 

2)And then the ALP decide to wheel out Malcolm Turnbull's own carbon tax solution from 2009 and the Murdoch Liberal Party is quick to the presses to churn its usual bile, until they realise they have been played by smarter minds.

3) the grandson of the Prime Minister of Australia releases details of the budget  WTF!!!. 

wots the colloquial term, um  fu#@tards? :


----------



## SirRumpole (2 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> 1) So now Manus Island has become a fiasco it's Kevin Rudd's (therefore Bill Shorten's) fault for not negotiating the agreement in perpetuity. Strange how the LNP (and half this discussion membership)  took credit for Kevin's work just a few years ago
> 
> 2)And then the ALP decide to wheel out Malcolm Turnbull's own carbon tax solution from 2009 and the Murdoch Liberal Party is quick to the presses to churn its usual bile, until they realise they have been played by smarter minds.
> 
> ...




Farce is another relevant word.

As is the LNPs transfer people to Cambodia scheme at $50 million each. A complete and utter failure which is also Labor's fault.


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Farce is another relevant word.
> 
> As is the LNPs transfer people to Cambodia scheme at $50 million each. A complete and utter failure which is also Labor's fault.




I'm starting to get worried that Labor or the Coalescing or the Greens will not be held in check by a crossbench. 

The out of control money spend by the current mob who proclaimed their economic credentials as prudential and fixers just over two years ago ..... Polonius would be proud:


"Give every man thy ear but few thy voice.
Take each man’s censure but reserve thy judgment.
Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy,

.......

Neither a borrower nor a lender be,
For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.
Farewell. My blessing season this in thee."


----------



## sptrawler (2 May 2016)

Sir Rumpole and Tisme, do you sit in the same room when you bounce off each other.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 May 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Sir Rumpole and Tisme, do you sit in the same room when you bounce off each other.




Like you and noco ?


----------



## sptrawler (2 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Like you and noco ?




Actually you won't find many posts by noco and I, that follow each other ad nauseam, as yours and tisme's do.

However that is your perogative and I respect that, it is just a bit nauseating the way you wax on together, but that may be just my opinion.
Anyway any positive comments for Bill, are welcomed, and needed.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 May 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Actually you won't find many posts by noco and I, that follow each other ad nauseam, as yours and tisme's do.




It only takes a bit of commonsense to see through this continual Labor blaming by the current government when they have been in for three years and have done stuff all except stuff ups (but giving them credit for stopping the boats).

They are failures in economic management, the deficit has been doubled, debt has gone from $250 bn in 2012 to $400 billion now, and this is what they said they were going to fix.

They are a shambles and they have run out of excuses.


----------



## sptrawler (2 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> It only takes a bit of commonsense to see through this continual Labor blaming by the current government when they have been in for three years and have done stuff all except stuff ups (but giving them credit for stopping the boats).
> 
> They are failures in economic management, the deficit has been doubled, debt has gone from $250 bn in 2012 to $400 billion now, and this is what they said they were going to fix.
> 
> They are a shambles and they have run out of excuses.




So what you are trying to say is, because the Government can't turn a $250 bn deficit with the ongoing interest costs around in three years, they've failed.

Let's just think on that, the LNP hasn't introduced any new major spending initiatives, since taking office. They are only honouring Labor commitments, that they are obliged to. 
Any spending cut initiatives, that where proposed were stopped by the Senate, therefore the only major saving has been stopping the boats.

You tell me what extra spending initiatives the LNP have introduced?

Therefore going to a double dissolution, IMO is a very good call, the people will get an option to choose and wear the consequences.

It will be a great outcome either way, because Australia will get the opportunity to chose their fate, if it isn't another hung parliament


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Actually you won't find many posts by noco and I, that follow each other ad nauseam, as yours and tisme's do.
> 
> However that is your perogative and I respect that, it is just a bit nauseating the way you wax on together, but that may be just my opinion.
> Anyway any positive comments for Bill, are welcomed, and needed.




Wot you mean Willis!!! 

The thing is I have a lot of time for Rumpole because he has consistently been a gentleman here and in previous digs. I don't agree with his apparent politics wholesale, but there are many ways to look at things in a Naked City ... for instance his love affair with Malcolm Turnbull predates his time here yet he still hopes against hope Mal with show some promise sometime, any time ....: similarly we had major differences on Rudd versus Gillard; he championed one and I couldn't give a 54it


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> It only takes a bit of commonsense to see through this continual Labor blaming by the current government when they have been in for three years and have done stuff all except stuff ups (but giving them credit for stopping the boats).
> 
> They are failures in economic management, the deficit has been doubled, debt has gone from $250 bn in 2012 to $400 billion now, and this is what they said they were going to fix.
> 
> They are a shambles and they have run out of excuses.




Frauds and grifters of the political system ..... gotta be hard for the blind faith fans


----------



## sptrawler (2 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Frauds and grifters of the political system ..... gotta be hard for the blind faith fans




Maybe you can enlighten me, to major extra spending initiatives, the LNP have introduced since entering office?


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Let's just think on that, the LNP hasn't introduced any new major spending initiatives, since taking office. They are only honouring Labor commitments, that they are obliged to.
> Any spending cut initiatives, that where proposed were stopped by the Senate, therefore the only major saving has been stopping the boats.
> 
> You tell me what extra spending initiatives the LNP have introduced?




Since when did the LNP ever show any kind of initiative? There whole existence is to oppose the ALP, which is filled with gyro gearlooses who come up with new, often daft, sometimes immoral ideas which the party adopts to ensure they spend more time in opposition than in govt. 

The LNP was voted in for fear of national bankruptcy and reversal of the bleed, not containment or continuance. Somewhere along the line the "mandate" notion emerged which was interpreted by Tony as "no negotiation, no surrender" and his gang set about insulting the cross bench and minors they needed to get legislation through.

By any measure the LNP has shown it does not have the skillset necessary for productive and forward thinking governance (not to be confused with abhorrent social engineering perpetrated as progress), which should suit the conservative, Andrew Bolt loving voter quite well.


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Maybe you can enlighten me, to major extra spending initiatives, the LNP have introduced since entering office?




You can't distill a shambles down to one nail. As I recall there was a $70bn pork barrel spend rather early in the peace which was reported on and the spendthrift has continued IMO


----------



## sptrawler (2 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Since when did the LNP ever show any kind of initiative? There whole existence is to oppose the ALP, which is filled with gyro gearlooses who come up with new, often daft, sometimes immoral ideas which the party adopts to ensure they spend more time in opposition than in govt.
> 
> The LNP was voted in for fear of national bankruptcy and reversal of the bleed, not containment or continuance. Somewhere along the line the "mandate" notion emerged which was interpreted by Tony as "no negotiation, no surrender" and his gang set about insulting the cross bench and minors they needed to get legislation through.
> 
> By any measure the LNP has shown it does not have the skillset necessary for productive and forward thinking governance (not to be confused with abhorrent social engineering perpetrated as progress), which should suit the conservative, Andrew Bolt loving voter quite well.




So to summarize, you can't say of any spending increases the LNP have enacted, you can only substantiate my claim, they couldn't get cuts through the Senate.

Like I said. it will be an enlightening election for Australia in general, it will set the course for our future lifestyle.
Can't wait for the election, no matter who wins, it is the best fun since Whitlam.IMO


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2016)

sptrawler said:


> So to summarize, you can't say of any spending increases the LNP have enacted, you can only substantiate my claim, they couldn't get cuts through the Senate.
> 
> Like I said. it will be an enlightening election for Australia in general, it will set the course for our future lifestyle.
> Can't wait for the election, no matter who wins, it is the best fun since Whitlam.IMO




Must I do the all the hack work? As soon as last week they committed us to a $50bn spend on underwater boats, another big spend on Frigates, they tried to throw billions of money at Victorians for a road to nowhere, they spent hundred of millions on witch hunt royal commissions, I dare say the spend on keeping undesirables in detention is more than ever conceived by big spending Rudd,


----------



## sptrawler (2 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Must I do the all the hack work? As soon as last week they committed us to a $50bn spend on underwater boats, another big spend on Frigates, they tried to throw billions of money at Victorians for a road to nowhere, they spent hundred of millions on witch hunt royal commissions, I dare say the spend on keeping undesirables in detention is more than ever conceived by big spending Rudd,




Hack work, you mean talk nonsense, lol, the $50bn talked about last week is a memerandum of understanding, to a tender process, I bet it isn't ratified until after the election. 
Same with the Frigates, it will be a promise of undertaking, if elected.
Well if you think the cost of keeping undesirables in detention is high, wait and see what happens if your mates get in.
As per usual you are waxing on wonderfully.


----------



## noco (2 May 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Hack work, you mean talk nonsense, lol, the $50bn talked about last week is a memerandum of understanding, to a tender process, I bet it isn't ratified until after the election.
> Same with the Frigates, it will be a promise of undertaking, if elected.
> Well if you think the cost of keeping undesirables in detention is high, wait and see what happens if your mates get in.
> As per usual you are waxing on wonderfully.




Some people just like to hear their own voice and what ever comes out of it.


----------



## sptrawler (2 May 2016)

Wow, ABC says Labor's tabacco tax costings are suss.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-...-questions-labor's-cigarette-costings/7377724

The really funny statement, quietly mentioned,IMO

*The discrepancy could be significant because Labor has used the forecast savings to pay for other funding promises.*

But then they put in the following.

*The Treasury document confirmed the Government will match Labor's policy.*

They may have matched the increased tax, have they used the forecasts to pay for other funding promises?


----------



## Tisme (3 May 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Hack work, you mean talk nonsense, lol, the $50bn talked about last week is a memerandum of understanding, to a tender process, I bet it isn't ratified until after the election.
> Same with the Frigates, it will be a promise of undertaking, if elected.
> Well if you think the cost of keeping undesirables in detention is high, wait and see what happens if your mates get in.
> As per usual you are waxing on wonderfully.




You have had a swipe at Rumpole and me as if you are important enough to hold court and instead of pulling your head in you continue with the insults?  If I can get on with Rumpole. luutzu and Tink and have opposing views, why does the prospect escape you? If you want to troll you should at least have the courtesy to announce it so I/we can ignore the bait and not be put through attempted personal denigration.

I have a deliberate habit of holding up mirrors to people's habitual nuances, it quite often results in aggressive behaviour for obvious reasons........ I assume life has depleted your pool of humour thus the inclination to biatch content?

And my voting intentions are well known. That you are confused shows you don't do your own homework....rather disappointing really given you showed conversational promise once.:frown:  I blame Bill Shorten.


----------



## Tisme (3 May 2016)

noco said:


> Some people just like to hear their own voice and what ever comes out of it.




Self deprecation doesn't suit you Noco... sounds trite and hollow coming from your keyboard of spit and vitriol.


Oh I get it. You are trying to use third man insults, how clever are you. HoHoHo you are so original and fresh, but you didn't fool me.

You guys are so funny, stop it, you are making me choke from laughing so much. Your PM inboxes must overheat with the back slapping and high fives.

When is that promoter of child exposure to licentious, debauched and salacious media going to chime in with his monochrome view of boat people as if he has some kind of moral compass? ding ding 

It's Rudds fault we are in the mess we are in; just ask anyone in the $450bn national debt creators/curators= LNP.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 May 2016)

I would really like a government that is not afraid to implement Right policies when the evidence is that they work best, and not be afraid of Left policies for the same reason, but the polarisation of politics indicates that this is not currently possible.

So it's a matter of the least worst option. Plutocracy under the LNP or social engineering under Labor.

The LNP's continual protection of those in the top 20% of income earners ($80k +) to the detriment of everyone else has led me to believe that the least worst option is a Labor government. I think they have the smarts in people like Chris Bowen, Jason Clare, Mark Butler etc , who are pragmatists and can take us forward, hopefully without the help of Bill, Tanya and Penny.

 The good thing is that they have only been out of power for three years and most of them remember what it's like being in government.

Having said that, Shorten is doing a good job for someone so bland, he may turn out to be Labor's John Howard.


----------



## Tisme (3 May 2016)

$451bn annual spend, current debt ~$450bn


LNP Govt = the party of fiscal rectitude and debt reduction.  .

When the LNP got in debt was 10.1% net;  what is it now? And remember the Swan budget forecasts ratified by treasury showed surplus budgets for five of the six forward years to 2018, immediately prior to the election.... the same treasury who worked up today's budget, not some private firm given a result and asked to substantiate it with made up data.


Sure new programs like the $250m Nannies trial are must have policy and expanding he public service to new levels of largesse are sensible, but just where has that elusive "budget emergency" gone into hiding? Come out come out wherever you are.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> but just where has that elusive "budget emergency" gone into hiding? Come out come out wherever you are.




The Abbott/Hockey/Turnbull/Morrison debt and deficit disasters are too ashamed to show their faces in public.


----------



## noco (3 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The Abbott/Hockey/Turnbull/Morrison debt and deficit disasters are too ashamed to show their faces in public.




I think you will find Shorten and Bowen have red faces this morning after Treasury revealed their $19 billion "BLACK HOLE" in their tobacco tax....They were going to spend the money they would not have been able to raise.

Who would like to see Chris Bowen as our treasurer?...A 6th grade school kid would have done much better I am sure.


Budget 2016: Labor funds for Gonski up in smoke

    The Australian
    May 3, 2016 12:00AM
    Save
    Print
    David Crowe
    Political correspondent
https://plus.google.com/101091338212849916588



*An election fight on economic management has erupted over a $19.5 billion funding hole in Labor’s plans to pay for its education policy, ahead of a federal budget that has thrown Bill *Shorten on the defensive over tax cuts for more than two million workers.

Treasury documents, seen by The Australian, reveal a massive gap in Labor’s plan to fund election promises with a steep rise in tobacco excise, showing it would raise $28.2bn over a decade rather than the $47.7bn the opposition claims.

In a dramatic upset on the eve of the federal election, the Treasury estimates forced Labor’s spokesman Chris Bowen to explain his election costings just as he sought to go on the attack against the government over the fairness of its budget reforms.*


----------



## Tisme (3 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The Abbott/Hockey/Turnbull/Morrison debt and deficit disasters are too ashamed to show their faces in public.





Unlike the Liberals who seem to abound on this board, I rely on the original doctrine there venerable party sweated on in 1945/46:

they (Bill Spooner and coy) made no secret of being the phoenix of the UAP ashes that Billy Hughes and Menzies created.

they also made no secret of being what "Labour" was not 

the Libs favoured:

Compulsory national service and partisan defence policy (instead of Curtin's bi partisanship);
Non means tested social security and an insurance scheme instead of the dole;
Improve honest labour and expunge class struggle;
Avoidance of over reach of penalties for strikes and lockouts;
Reduction of wartime taxation rates;
Preferential British Empire trade;
Price fixing at the farm gate to protect primary producers;
Keynesian economics instead of monopolistic UAP laissez faire policy;

and, wait for it ....avoid sending the country into depression at all costs.


----------



## Tisme (3 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I would really like a government that is not afraid to implement Right policies when the evidence is that they work best, and not be afraid of Left policies for the same reason, but the polarisation of politics indicates that this is not currently possible.
> 
> So it's a matter of the least worst option. Plutocracy under the LNP or social engineering under Labor.
> 
> ...




Labor is so entrenched as being the self appointed social conscience of Australia, it manifestly over reaches itself when it comes to pushing uncomfortable social obedience on us. I still think of that poor b4stard of the LNP when he got into this govt and wanted to get our freedom of insult back ....... in the end he had to apologise for his natural instincts.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Labor is so entrenched as being the self appointed social conscience of Australia, it manifestly over reaches itself when it comes to pushing uncomfortable social obedience on us. I still think of that poor b4stard of the LNP when he got into this govt and wanted to get our freedom of insult back ....... in the end he had to apologise for his natural instincts.




True, but I think the social conscience is moving further to the Left; ie The Greens and Hanson Young. Labor can't claim to have much of a social conscience after Mannus and Nauru.

In the end I'd prefer a civilised debate to an insulting one, but I agree it should be up to the individual not the law where one stops and the other starts.


----------



## Tisme (3 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> True, but I think the social conscience is moving further to the Left; ie The Greens and Hanson Young. Labor can't claim to have much of a social conscience after Mannus and Nauru.
> 
> In the end I'd prefer a civilised debate to an insulting one, but I agree it should be up to the individual not the law where one stops and the other starts.




Insults are rarely given with impunity in a natural environment. I'm not sure what the PC brigade hoped to achieve, but it's all still there behind closed doors. Some idiots of course take it too far and even allow themselves to be video victims for the whole world to see their base behaviours .... like those music videos that feature crotches, bums, boobs, sodom and gomorrah.


----------



## Tisme (3 May 2016)

1951 Article ... sounds like it's written by a familiar hand: 

It's a wonder we survived the catastrophe beset us:



> MR.. MENZIES AND COMMUNISM
> (To the Editor,)
> Sir,””
> In May, 1948, while the Labor Party was in power, an Australia-wide referendum was held
> ...




This is about a man who publicly stated  _"If asked if 1 would take steps to make the Communist Party illegal in times of peace* I would answer 'No*. I would be extremely reluctant to take such a step.'_ back in 1946.


----------



## Logique (3 May 2016)

It's getting willing in this thread! 

Must admit the thought of a hung parliament, controlled by Tony Windsor and the Xenophon faction, puts me in a cold sweat.

Much of the Abbott and Turnbull spending cut program was blocked by the Senate, that's an unassailable fact. It has helped lead us to this double dissolution.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 May 2016)

Logique said:


> Much of the Abbott and Turnbull spending cut program was blocked by the Senate, that's an unassailable fact. It has helped lead us to this double dissolution.




Most of them were blocked because they were broken promises eg the Medicare levy.

The Senate is there to stop despotism, and it did.


----------



## moXJO (3 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> When is that promoter of child exposure to licentious, debauched and salacious media going to chime in with his monochrome view of boat people as if he has some kind of moral compass? ding ding
> 
> .




Come on big fella, give us a hug.

It's ok that you're  still in the closet.
One day you will come out and be proud of who you are.
A liberal in denial.

Actually I was trying to rile rumpy  up. But that guy is one cool customer.


----------



## Tisme (3 May 2016)

moXJO said:


> Come on big fella, give us a hug.
> 
> It's ok that you're  still in the closet.
> One day you will come out and be proud of who you are.
> ...





See that's the paradox with Rumpole, so much so that a few of us Qandarians toyed the notion of creating a fifth wheel party a few years back.... apathy took its natural course.

It is true though that the Abbott govt tried to append a bridge too far bills to the ones that might have passed uncontested.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> See that's the paradox with Rumpole, so much so that a few of us Qandarians toyed the notion of creating a fifth wheel party a few years back.... apathy took its natural course.




Weren't we going to call it the Tispole Party or similar ?


----------



## luutzu (3 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Weren't we going to call it the Tispole Party or similar ?




You two need a room to bed and iron a few things out?


----------



## Tisme (3 May 2016)

Emma's having a field day on Lateline tonight. I felt sorry for Mathias who once again blamed Labor instead of owning the budget.


----------



## CanOz (4 May 2016)

Where are Teasme and SirButthole? The labor party must have called them back to reformulate thier strategy


----------



## SirRumpole (4 May 2016)

CanOz said:


> Where are Teasme and SirButthole? The labor party must have called them back to reformulate thier strategy




I'm here !

The Budget wasn't worth commenting on.

It's an irrelevant piece of fluff that panders to Liberal supporters and ignores everyone else.

Pffftt.:bad:


----------



## CanOz (4 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I'm here !
> 
> The Budget wasn't worth commenting on.
> 
> ...




Gosh i was getting concerned, thought you might have moved to NZ with the Frenchman...


----------



## SirRumpole (4 May 2016)

Canoz,

Interesting that you didn't disagree with my comments on the Budget.


----------



## CanOz (4 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Canoz,
> 
> Interesting that you didn't disagree with my comments on the Budget.




Can't argue with that!


----------



## Tisme (4 May 2016)

CanOz said:


> Where are Teasme and SirButthole? The labor party must have called them back to reformulate thier strategy




Been busy transferring a few hundred thous into my super account.

I suppose I could call on my Labor colleagues, but I would probably not be all that welcome.


----------



## Tisme (4 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I'm here !
> 
> The Budget wasn't worth commenting on.
> 
> ...




Isn't it Labor's budget lite?


----------



## noco (4 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I'm here !
> 
> The Budget wasn't worth commenting on.
> 
> ...




Is that the best you can do?

I would not have expected anything else from you even if it is a good budget.

I don't hear you criticizing your Fabian mates with their $19.5 billion "TOBACCO BLACK HOLE"...How are they now going to finance the NDIS? 

Come on Rumpy, what do you think?....Your silence is deafening.:badsmile:


----------



## SirRumpole (4 May 2016)

noco said:


> Come on Rumpy, what do you think?....Your silence is deafening.:badsmile:




Labor got their policy costed by the Parliamentary Budget Office who said it would bring in $40 bn. Treasury said $20 bn. 

I suggest you ask those two bodies where the discrepancy is.


----------



## noco (4 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Labor got their policy costed by the Parliamentary Budget Office who said it would bring in $40 bn. Treasury said $20 bn.
> 
> I suggest you ask those two bodies where the discrepancy is.




Do you have a link or is it just superstition on your part to protect the LUG party...So that relieves the botch Chris Bowen has made...Blame someone else...You know that bloke that wants to be the treasurer of Aus.

What about Swannies mining tax income that never happened..The mining tax that was supposed to have paid for the NDIS...The mining tax that cost more to administer than what it recovered...I guess you will blame the Parliamentary Budget office for that one as well.?


----------



## SirRumpole (4 May 2016)

noco said:


> Do you have a link or is it just superstition on your part to protect the LUG party...So that relieves the botch Chris Bowen has made...Blame someone else...You know that bloke that wants to be the treasurer of Aus.




Do your own research I'm sure you'll find it.


----------



## noco (4 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Do your own research I'm sure you'll find it.




I am sure if you knew, you would say...It is obvious to me you have just made it up.

You have taken the easy way out when challenged.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 May 2016)

noco said:


> I am sure if you knew, you would say...It is obvious to me you have just made it up.
> 
> You have taken the easy way out when challenged.




Geez, noco, don't be so lazy.

Here is one for you.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/fede...le-claim-on-labor-policy-20160503-goktl0.html


----------



## Tisme (4 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Geez, noco, don't be so lazy.
> 
> Here is one for you.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/business/fede...le-claim-on-labor-policy-20160503-goktl0.html




Figures from the not so independent Parliamentary Budget Office perhaps? Remember Gordon Greche anyone...if you can buy one you can probably by many. :

Rumpole can I remind you of the book "The Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists" and the futility of reason when it comes to servile voters.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Figures from the not so independent Parliamentary Budget Office perhaps? Remember Gordon Greche anyone...if you can buy one you can probably by many. :
> 
> Rumpole can I remind you of the book "The Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists" and the futility of reason when it comes to servile voters.




Thanks I must read it sometime. It wasn't on my school's reading list, but having just read a precis it sounds interesting.

I think you know who would fit in well .


----------



## Tisme (4 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Thanks I must read it sometime. It wasn't on my school's reading list, but having just read a precis it sounds interesting.
> 
> I think you know who would fit in well .




nod's as good as a wink to a blind bat


----------



## Tisme (4 May 2016)

Pete gets memed>

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ame-an-everevolving-meme-20160503-golhmv.html


----------



## noco (4 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Geez, noco, don't be so lazy.
> 
> Here is one for you.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/business/fede...le-claim-on-labor-policy-20160503-goktl0.html




*What Labor overlooked is the fact that there will fewer smokers come 2016......They based their assumptions on the current numbers of smokers......But not surprising to learn Chris Bowen would not have thought of that nor did the Parliamentary Budget Office.

December's mid-year economic update contained a 3.8 per cent reduction in tobacco consumption. 

The finding indicates that Treasury has identified a recent sharp declined in tobacco consumption in Australia.

The government will adopt Labor's policy of a tax increase of 12.5 per cent a year for four years but will unveil a much smaller revenue boost of $2.3 billion over four years and $28.2 billion over 10 years in Tuesday's budget. 
Sponsored by NAB

Labor said it would generate $3.8 billion over four years, and $47.7 billion over 10 years, based on modelling by the PBO, when it announced its policy in November.

On Tuesday, Treasurer Scott Morrison accused Opposition Leader Bill Shorten of using the "bookkeeping skills of unions".

"Labor has a gaping black hole of about $20 billion over the next 10 years over their excise proposal," he said.

The plan would see a packet of 25 cigarettes cost more than $40 by 2020, up from about $25 a pack today.
*
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/fede...bor-policy-20160503-goktl0.html#ixzz47gjDBQXN
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook


----------



## noco (4 May 2016)

noco said:


> *What Labor overlooked is the fact that there will fewer smokers come 2026.....They based their assumptions on the current numbers of smokers......But not surprising to learn Chris Bowen would not have thought of that nor did the Parliamentary Budget Office.
> 
> December's mid-year economic update contained a 3.8 per cent reduction in tobacco consumption.
> 
> ...




*CORRECTION*

Typo error.

What Labor overlooked is the fact that there will fewer smokers come 2026......They based their assumptions on the current numbers of smokers......But not surprising to learn Chris Bowen would not have thought of that nor did the Parliamentary Budget Office.


----------



## Tisme (5 May 2016)

noco said:


> *CORRECTION*
> 
> Typo error.
> 
> What Labor overlooked is the fact that there will fewer smokers come 2026......They based their assumptions on the current numbers of smokers......But not surprising to learn Chris Bowen would not have thought of that nor did the Parliamentary Budget Office.




http://www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au/chapter-1-prevalence/1-3-prevalence-of-smoking-adults


----------



## noco (5 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> http://www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au/chapter-1-prevalence/1-3-prevalence-of-smoking-adults




Thanks for that link Tisme......I found it most interesting......There has been a definite trend down over the past years. 

I, personally was a smoker for 28 years ...40 + per day......I quit on the 1st May 1976.


----------



## noco (5 May 2016)

The Turnbull Government receives top marks for a good budget.....Can't wait see more of Labor's "BLACK HOLE" in tonight's budget reply by Barnacle Bill.


http://www.smh.com.au/comment/feder...at-it-the-better-it-gets-20160504-golu0t.html


----------



## Knobby22 (5 May 2016)

Two excellent articles in the AGE (and SMH) on how good the budget is.
Possibly the best thought out budget over the last 10 years. No point pulling out bits of it. Worth a read.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 May 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Two excellent articles in the AGE (and SMH) on how good the budget is.
> Possibly the best thought out budget over the last 10 years. No point pulling out bits of it. Worth a read.




Good for who ?


----------



## noco (5 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Good for who ?




Everyone except Sir Rumpole.....never satisfied no matter what....Time to clear your head of all that Labor brainwashing propaganda...

Come on over Rumpy....The grass is "GREENER" on our side of the fence.....Get with the winners....We even put cream on our strawberries instead of manure....They taste much better


----------



## Knobby22 (5 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Good for who ?




For the country ... not the rich. Read this article by Chief economist of the Age Peter martin.
Also read Malcolm Maidens article. Both respected unbiased economic commentators

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/fe...at-it-the-better-it-gets-20160504-golu0t.html


----------



## SirRumpole (5 May 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> For the country ... not the rich. Read this article by Chief economist of the Age Peter martin.
> Also read Malcolm Maidens article. Both respected unbiased economic commentators
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/comment/fe...at-it-the-better-it-gets-20160504-golu0t.html




There is no sight of the end to the debt and deficit disaster exacerbated by this government, which has doubled both debt and deficit and this budget shows no signs that it has any idea of how to reduce it.

Both parties are now gutless, the elephant is in the room and neither can see it. Labor got sat on by it, and the Libs just feed it because it's one of their mates.

It's called the mining industry.

Our minerals being shipped overseas at cheap rates and with little return for the country except a few jobs in isolated places.

It's time a Minerals Resource Rent tax was revisited. There as been a RRT on oil and gas for decades and the sky hasn't fallen in, we are exporting gas like crazy.

A MRRT is the only way we can get out of debt realistically, and the Libs and Labor are fools for not making the most of one of the few inherent assets this country has got.


----------



## qldfrog (5 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> There is no sight of the end to the debt and deficit disaster exacerbated by this government, which has doubled both debt and deficit and this budget shows no signs that it has any idea of how to reduce it.
> 
> Both parties are now gutless, the elephant is in the room and neither can see it. Labor got sat on by it, and the Libs just feed it because it's one of their mates.
> 
> ...



Some truth here, SirRmpole and I could maybe move to NZ as suggested by a member  
but overall not too bad; was just sickedned by the amount of "what is in for me??" Australia has definitively changed for the worse in the last 20y...NZ?


----------



## SirRumpole (5 May 2016)

I might also say that the refusal to touch negative gearing which costs the taxpayer $5 billion a year, has caused a property bubble and prevented people from investing in their own homes has marked this government as one which puts itself above the national interest.

Malcolm Turnbull is a hypocrite, he described once negative gearing as "tax avoidance", but now he's more concerned about people who already own their own home than he is about people trying to buy one.


----------



## drsmith (5 May 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> For the country ... not the rich. Read this article by Chief economist of the Age Peter martin.
> Also read Malcolm Maidens article. Both respected unbiased economic commentators
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/comment/fe...at-it-the-better-it-gets-20160504-golu0t.html



Regardless of the merit, both Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison are copping a hard time over the 10yr cost of the company tax cut.

http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...urnbull_in_a_tangle_up_is_down_costed_is_not/

In the linked interview with David Spears, Malcolm Turnbull refers to a chart on page 321 of budget Paper 1. What's he's actually referring to is the chart on page 21 of statement 3 or page 3-21.

http://www.budget.gov.au/2016-17/content/bp1/download/bp1.pdf

That shows the overall budget balance to 2026 which is where Malcolm tried to divert direct questions on the 10yr cost of the company tax cuts.

While costed as part of the overall budget balance to 10 years, the government is in strife in a specific cost offset sense and it is through this which Malcolm Turnbull had to struggle through the above interview.

Politically, the government should have just focused on the first 4 years of the company tax cuts in the budget and left the rest till after the election. 

As it presently stands, the government's attempt to regain control of the economic narrative through the budget has at the very least hit a snag.  It will be interesting to see how or even if Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison can dig themselves out of this in QT.


----------



## Tisme (5 May 2016)

noco said:


> Thanks for that link Tisme......I found it most interesting......There has been a definite trend down over the past years.
> 
> I, personally was a smoker for 28 years ...40 + per day......I quit on the 1st May 1976.




Yes it's rather encouraging that people aren't deliberately making themselves sick Noco. Rotten thing drug addiction


----------



## Tisme (5 May 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> For the country ... not the rich. Read this article by Chief economist of the Age Peter martin.
> Also read Malcolm Maidens article. Both respected unbiased economic commentators
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/comment/fe...at-it-the-better-it-gets-20160504-golu0t.html




Wedge politics might be getting in the way of the message. I have to say I was rather surprised the Libs are still confident of retaining the lower class vote even though they are overtly favouring the fertile heartland of both majors.

Bill will win from this because he owns the moral high ground in the debate, even though it might well be shaky ground at that.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 May 2016)

I listened to some of Question Time today and I heard Turnbull say that investors will "only" be able to sell their houses to owner occupiers.

Just shows what he thinks of the Mums and Dads trying to put their own roof over their kids heads. They are just there to fill the tanks of the Range Rovers in his electorate.

Pretty bl**dy disgusting for someone supposed to govern for everyone.


----------



## Knobby22 (5 May 2016)

drsmith said:


> Politically, the government should have just focused on the first 4 years of the company tax cuts in the budget and left the rest till after the election.
> 
> As it presently stands, the government's attempt to regain control of the economic narrative through the budget has at the very least hit a snag.  It will be interesting to see how or even if Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison can dig themselves out of this in QT.




I heard one of the lobbyists before the budget brag that they had got the Government to make long term announcements. Stupid. As if they will be in power in 10 years anyway and it only lowers their chances this year.


----------



## Tisme (5 May 2016)

Dammit, when over confidence gets in the way of the facts:

red face interview:

http://www.news.com.au/finance/econ...r/news-story/884775519dce8c4794da11a82892665e


----------



## sptrawler (5 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I listened to some of Question Time today and I heard Turnbull say that investors will "only" be able to sell their houses to owner occupiers.
> 
> Just shows what he thinks of the Mums and Dads trying to put their own roof over their kids heads. They are just there to fill the tanks of the Range Rovers in his electorate.
> 
> Pretty bl**dy disgusting for someone supposed to govern for everyone.




Likewise the owner occupiers, will only be able to sell their houses to owner occupiers, that won't pay a premium.

It swings both ways.


----------



## luutzu (6 May 2016)

Tisme said:


> Dammit, when over confidence gets in the way of the facts:
> 
> red face interview:
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/finance/econ...r/news-story/884775519dce8c4794da11a82892665e




Corporate tax cut is not a cost, David. It's an investment.

See, when you lighten the tax burden on corporations, they will take that extra cash and hand it right back to mum and dad shareholders; they hire more people; and they make more investment for our new Innovation Boom.

This boom is good for corporations - they make more money; we tax them less but get more bang at less rate. 
It will be good for Australian workers as more of them will be employed - what with the new cash corporations now have to not do anything but reinvest and go on hiring binge... 

Good all round. And that is why Scott and I will cut further in coming years. You can't have too much of a good thing now can you?


_What about the students and increasing uni fees? Unaffordable Housing? High level of personal debt?_
As you know, David. People, especially young and poor people, they have no stakeholders and no responsibilities  - unlike corporations. 

Oh! Squirrel! Gotta go.


----------



## Tisme (6 May 2016)

luutzu said:


> Corporate tax cut is not a cost, David. It's an investment.
> 
> See, when you lighten the tax burden on corporations, they will take that extra cash and hand it right back to mum and dad shareholders; they hire more people; and they make more investment for our new Innovation Boom.
> 
> ...




Thanks luutzu, I wasn't really all that enthralled at the content, more the meltdown as that dark mist consumed Malcolm and his tongue.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 May 2016)

Some comments on Morrison's jobs scheme, but also the future of work.


Why do we keep inventing programs for jobs that just aren't there?


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-05/dunlop-another-job-scheme-sham/7384338


----------



## moXJO (7 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Some comments on Morrison's jobs scheme, but also the future of work.
> 
> 
> Why do we keep inventing programs for jobs that just aren't there?
> ...




The jobs are there. There's massive off the books employment around a lot of industries. Without it there would be thousands more suckling up govt benefits.

Employing people here can be a headache. A lot of red tape and compliance. But it also protects workers.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 May 2016)

moXJO said:


> The jobs are there. There's massive* off the books* employment around a lot of industries. Without it there would be thousands more suckling up govt benefits.
> 
> Employing people here can be a headache. A lot of red tape and compliance. But it also protects workers.




You mean undisclosed casual labour ?


----------



## Logique (7 May 2016)

Can't remember a more confusing election. Completely nonplussed about who to vote for 

Annoyed at the Coalition continually chipping away at Medicare, and it's regressive instincts.

Annoyed that Labor simply won't drop it's ETS/Carbon tax fantasy, and obsessive preoccupation with gay marriage, as if this was the biggest issue facing the nation. Not to mention the entrenched unionism


----------



## SirRumpole (7 May 2016)

Logique said:


> Can't remember a more confusing election. Completely nonplussed about who to vote for
> 
> Annoyed at the Coalition continually chipping away at Medicare, and it's regressive instincts.
> 
> Annoyed that Labor simply won't drop it's ETS/Carbon tax fantasy, and obsessive preoccupation with gay marriage, as if this was the biggest issue facing the nation. Not to mention the entrenched unionism




Agree Logique about Labor's gay marriage fascination, also it's women's equality push. Nothing wrong with equality but there is a big financial mess to sort out first.

 I actually think Labor is being more financially responsible this time with it's negative gearing policy, no tax cuts for corporations and tobacco tax which the Coalition pinched.


----------



## MrBurns (7 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Agree Logique about Labor's gay marriage fascination, also it's women's equality push. Nothing wrong with equality but there is a big financial mess to sort out first.
> 
> I actually think Labor is being more financially responsible this time with it's negative gearing policy, no tax cuts for corporations and tobacco tax which the Coalition pinched.




Agree re negative gearing, that's the kicker for me, Turnbull is out of touch.


----------



## Logique (7 May 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Agree Logique about Labor's gay marriage fascination, also it's women's equality push. Nothing wrong with equality but there is a big financial mess to sort out first.
> I actually think Labor is being more financially responsible this time with it's negative gearing policy, no tax cuts for corporations and tobacco tax which the Coalition pinched.



I can't disagree with you SirR, or Burnsie in #1007. 

I like Labor's negative gearing policy. And nothing against maternal leave _per se_, but we all need to 'tighten our belts', as it were.


----------



## Tisme (22 May 2016)

http://www.sbs.com.au/yourlanguage/...skilled-occupations-list-sol-announced?cid=tr


----------



## drsmith (23 May 2016)

Since I made my original comments about Labor's NG and CGT policies, an additional consideration has come to mind in relation to NG.

What happens is someone buys an old house, demolishes it, and builds a new house ?


----------



## ggkfc (23 May 2016)

If only trickle-down economics actually worked, corporate tax policies would be viable


----------



## SirRumpole (23 May 2016)

ggkfc said:


> If only trickle-down economics actually worked, corporate tax policies would be viable




Small business that can't use complex structures to avoid tax probably deserve a tax cut, but who doesn't ?

The question is who to target to provide the best bang for the buck. IMO it should be the consumers as there is a more definite link between disposable income and spending. Whether business will employ more people or just import job destroying technology after a tax cut is less certain.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 July 2016)

Has Turnbull got the guts to crack down on corporate tax avoidance ?


I doubt it.


http://theconversation.com/multinat...dance is still a revenue issue for government
--


----------



## pixel (14 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Small business that can't use complex structures to avoid tax probably deserve a tax cut, but who doesn't ?
> 
> The question is who to target to provide the best bang for the buck. IMO it should be the consumers as there is a more definite link between disposable income and spending. Whether business will employ more people or just import job destroying technology after a tax cut is less certain.




There are different kinds of businesses across the range.
Some Biggies may well pay their fair share and pass all of the 30% paid on as dividend imputation. Others benefit from loopholes, dodgy tax haven deals, up to pure unadulterated fraud.
Likewise, there are small businesses that operate and pay taxes like the rest of us. But remember that many small businesses are also family enterprises, subcontractors, window cleaners, used car dealers, ... Care to guesstimate the percentage of "Pay cash, no receipt"?

Any blanket changes targeting "Small Business" indiscriminately will merely punish (or marginally benefit) the honest ones. In the main though, increasing the GST or lowering Income Tax will remain ineffective.


----------



## Logique (14 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> Since I made my original comments about Labor's NG and CGT policies, an additional consideration has come to mind in relation to NG.
> What happens is someone buys an old house, demolishes it, and builds a new house ?



An interesting one, because houses are approved by local government, but negative gearing by the Feds (ATO).

A possible loophole, depending upon the quality and timeliness of local government advice to the ATO.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 July 2016)

> What happens is someone buys an old house, demolishes it, and builds a new house ?




Maybe allow a proportion of the full deduction, or cap it to five years say.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 July 2016)

The gall of some people


*Financial services firm KPMG said the least damaging choice for the Government is to cut spending rather than raise taxes.
*

KPMG who was outed for  helping their multi national clients avoid billions in tax every year.


Lets see their clients pay more rather than people who can least afford it.


Credit rating: Spending cuts to fix budget must be Government priority says KPMG


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-...pair-must-be-government-priority-kpmg/7629626


----------



## pixel (14 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The gall of some people
> 
> *Financial services firm KPMG said the least damaging choice for the Government is to cut spending rather than raise taxes.
> *KPMG who was outed for  helping their multi national clients avoid billions in tax every year.
> ...



I reckon, Paul Keating got it right: *Australia is a pimple on the R's end of the World.*
That implies that the Mr Bigs in International Finance can play football with us, give advice to their Multi-National clients how to bypass little Oz interests - all for the greater good of their self-interest. And our Media and Politicians are stupid enough to take it all lying down. Gloat when Mr Prez calls our PM his little deputy on the other side...
Have they all forgotten S&P's "Credit" ratings of CDOs? How credible are their ratings when we compare rubbery figures from the US to those from Oz?

It's time for our PM to "grow a pair" and *start putting the interests of the  Australian People ahead of Big Business and its shareholders in the US and UK.*


----------



## drsmith (14 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The gall of some people



As you've critiqued only the author and not the contents of the report itself, I'll assume you haven't read it. 

https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam...deficit-australia-credit-rating-july-2016.pdf


----------



## SirRumpole (14 July 2016)

drsmith said:


> As you've critiqued only the author and not the contents of the report itself, I'll assume you haven't read it.
> 
> https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam...deficit-australia-credit-rating-july-2016.pdf




I searched that document for "tax avoidance" and came up with nothing.

Was it mentioned in different wording ?


----------



## drsmith (14 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I searched that document for "tax avoidance" and came up with nothing.
> 
> Was it mentioned in different wording ?



Assumption confirmed.


----------



## Tisme (15 July 2016)

China not happy with Julie Bishop


----------



## SirRumpole (15 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> China not happy with Julie Bishop




China is never happy with anyone except fawning synchophants to the cause of the PRC.


----------



## Logique (15 July 2016)

So the bookies got it right about the election result.  Here are their new predictions:  http://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting...deral-politics/outrights?ev_oc_grp_id=1983532

Oh dear, still only third, but advancing upon Scott Morrison, drip by drip..so to speak


----------



## Knobby22 (19 July 2016)

Pleased with the reshuffle.
As the Headline in the AGE states: "Turnbull rewards backers"

The Newscorp push to bring back the old Conservatives (front page the Australian) failed.
Eric Abetz whinges that he has no one now in the ministry from Tasmania. Well he pushed the minister he had to 5th on the ticket to get rid of him. He also lost all the seats in Tasmania due to his stupid behaviour. The Libs need to find a way to make sure that he is removed for the next election.


----------



## Tisme (19 July 2016)

If you can't trust the Australia Institute, who can you trust:


https://www.theguardian.com/busines...nomic-managers-since-menzies?CMP=share_btn_fb


----------



## SirRumpole (19 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> If you can't trust the Australia Institute, who can you trust:
> 
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/busines...nomic-managers-since-menzies?CMP=share_btn_fb






> In effect Howard was a very good downhill skier – good at looking good while things were easy; but the Rudd (and Gillard and Keating) governments were much better at outperforming the rest of the world.




What I've been saying for years.


----------



## sptrawler (19 July 2016)

What the Tisme, Sir Rumpole, glee club.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 July 2016)

sptrawler said:


> What the Tisme, Sir Rumpole, glee club.




We all need some fun in life...


----------



## Tisme (19 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> We all need some fun in life...




Death by a thousand cuts club LOL. 

Just goes to show how two consenting adults with differing political views can get along regardless of RUMPOLE'S obvious poor party choices. :


----------



## SirRumpole (19 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> Death by a thousand cuts club LOL.
> 
> Just goes to show how two consenting adults with differing political views can get along regardless of RUMPOLE'S obvious poor party choices. :




Yeah, but as Maxwell Smart might say, "missed it by THAT much".


----------



## Logique (25 July 2016)

The burning question now is, who will be the new Nodders, to sit behind the PM.  Two prominent nodders got voted out on 2 July.  We'll just have to wait until Parliament sits again. 

It's a prestigious but demanding role. You must at all times look serene and self assured, even reverential.


----------



## pixel (25 July 2016)

Tisme said:


> If you can't trust the Australia Institute, who can you trust:
> 
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/busines...nomic-managers-since-menzies?CMP=share_btn_fb




Thanks Tisme 
Finally somebody has the guts to tell us the truth.


----------



## dutchie (29 July 2016)

Turnbull finally made a good decision. Saved Australia any embarrassment.

The UN is damn-aweful but still they did not deserve Krudd!


----------



## SirRumpole (29 July 2016)

dutchie said:


> Turnbull finally made a good decision. Saved Australia any embarrassment.
> 
> The UN is damn-aweful but still they did not deserve Krudd!




Nah he's just weak and can't stand up to the haters in his party.

Talk about unsuitable, Joe Hockey and Amanda Vanstone come to mind.


----------



## Tisme (29 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Nah he's just weak and can't stand up to the haters in his party.
> 
> Talk about unsuitable, Joe Hockey and Amanda Vanstone come to mind.




Typical spiteful attitude one would expect from the average man with a vag, not from a leader who is supposed to govern for the vast majority, not just the quarter who voted his party in. Tony Abbott well and truly poisoned the Lib Party with juvenile hate.

Now we live with the spectre of him returning to Oz more often than not!


----------



## Logique (29 July 2016)

Helen Clark of NZ is an immensely more suitable and more stable candidate, and Australia is better off to get behind her nomination. 

If it's to be someone from Australasia, then Helen Clark is the one.

The right Captain's Pick by the PM I think.  

One in the eye for Rudd's nomination booster "_Nothing under $400 suits_", that's just a bonus.


----------



## noco (29 July 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Nah he's just weak and can't stand up to the haters in his party.
> 
> Talk about unsuitable, Joe Hockey and Amanda Vanstone come to mind.




But even his own party called all sorts of names after he left office......Perhaps they are regretting those words which obviously has gone against him.

Anyway, even if he had been nominated, the Chinese were waiting for him with a base ball bat...


----------



## Tisme (15 August 2016)

anyone see a problem with this argument:



> Immigration Minister Peter Dutton has accused asylum seekers and refugees of making false abuse allegations and self-immolating in order to get to Australia.


----------



## Logique (15 August 2016)

S18C and 'angry white males'.  Sen Lleyonhelm poses the question.



> http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...h/comments/monday_noticeboard14/#commentsmore
> *Gillian Triggs’s ridiculous Human Rights Commission cops a colour-based complaint*...
> ...Alan of Sydney replied to Mick
> Mon 15 Aug 16 (09:53am)
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (15 August 2016)

Tisme said:


> anyone see a problem with this argument:




The self immolators get treated here and sent back if they survive. It seems an extreme way to get a temporary stay in Australia.


----------



## Tisme (18 August 2016)

Just to preempt the coming argument about the govt's budget and Labor's supposed commitment during the election to support Turnbull 's election promises:

http://www.news.com.au/national/fed...3/news-story/5ddd2970f469d803f88c3c1eddaa8841

and don't forget the bipartisan support SCotty gave the ALP:



> Scott Morrison addressed the opposition’s announcements, labelling them a “song and dance” with no real substance.
> “They change their position so often,” Morrison said in a statement.
> “They remain in a big black hole. They threw a few pebbles in it today but gone nowhere near filling it.”
> He said the “great mystery” from today’s announcement is how “they pretend to end up in a budget balance by 2021”.
> “What we saw today was frankly embarrassing. No wonder they put it out on a Friday. It was embarrassing.”


----------



## Tisme (18 August 2016)

Manus Island was a once a pivot to freedom for Australia:

http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/27582593




> Sad Story Of The Base
> At Manus Island
> The decline and fall of the great U.S. naval and air base at Manus Island;is an obscure passage of post-war history. While visiting Manus, I have tried to supplement the information published on the matter by questioning people who were on the island since the war and saw some of the queer things that happened there.
> 
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (18 August 2016)

Tisme said:


> Just to preempt the coming argument about the govt's budget and Labor's supposed commitment during the election to support Turnbull 's election promises:
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/national/fed...3/news-story/5ddd2970f469d803f88c3c1eddaa8841
> 
> and don't forget the bipartisan support SCotty gave the ALP:






If the government want compromise from Labor, maybe they should be prepared to compromise in return ?

Negative gearing perhaps ?


----------



## Tisme (18 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> If the government want compromise from Labor, maybe they should be prepared to compromise in return ?
> 
> Negative gearing perhaps ?




Apparently wining by one seat and gaining ~25% of the vote is tantamount to a magical mandate to the Libs, so they should get on and govern accordingly. I seem to recall Tony Abbott delighted his fawning voter fans and Rupert by being an obstropolous prick even when our nation was buckling under the collapse of Wall Street....

............but then again we had a phantom surplus left us by our venerated benefactor John Howard who had already spent that pot of gold plus another $70bn in his last pork barelling legacy budget. I could understand Tony's hate that Labor would lay claim to that debt.

Even Tony now admits he seeded the "hyper-partisanship" ... shame he didn't start wearing long trousers a long time ago.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 August 2016)

Time for sugar, salt and fat taxes ?


We probably can't afford our health system otherwise.


Private Healthcare Australia blames steep health premiums on fixed prices for medical devices


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-22/costly-health-insurance-blamed-on-fixed-prices/7771568


----------



## Tisme (23 August 2016)

See our juvenile Finance aeroplane jelly Minister is still cementing his credentials by reciting Wibble Wobble to tease his classmate Billy.

I'm sure his antics will delight some with arrested development, but I fail to see how it progresses an environment of accord...perhaps that is the agenda:- haven't got the stomach to govern effectively so create a diversion and blame someone else ....wibble wobble, wibble wobble, jelly n a plate.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 August 2016)

Tisme said:


> See our juvenile Finance aeroplane jelly Minister is still cementing his credentials by reciting Wibble Wobble to tease his classmate Billy.
> 
> I'm sure his antics will delight some with arrested development, but I fail to see how it progresses an environment of accord...perhaps that is the agenda:- haven't got the stomach to govern effectively so create a diversion and blame someone else ....wibble wobble, wibble wobble, jelly n a plate.




They haven't learned anything, they are still playing Party Games, blaming, insulting and mocking their opponents.

Great way to run a country, not.


----------



## noco (23 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> They haven't learned anything, they are still playing Party Games, blaming, insulting and mocking their opponents.
> 
> Great way to run a country, not.




Rumpy, I will tell you  the best way to run the country....

We need to spend more money...Put it on the SPEND-O-METER....Let the grand kids pay for it.

We've gotta get the place movin' again......We've gotta move fooooorwaaaard.....We have to get Kevin and Julia back they will show you how to run the country.

Yeah we need more overpriced school halls.....pink bats( 4 deaths and over 200 house fires).....more over priced school halls....more illegal boat people (don't worry about the social security bill to keep them for the rest of their bleedin' lives....more $900 Ruddy cheques ...cash for clunkers....food watch....fuel watch....carbon dioxide tax....mineral resources tax....Gonski ....NDIS.

Now that's the way to run a country.

Sorry to sound like a cracked record but one has to keep reminding you why we are are in the mess we are in today.....Ah yes...of course...we had a GFC.....don't know how we will handle the next one though.....there ain't no money left in the bank.....

Down with democracy.....down with free speech.....down with the good way of life we once knew.

Up with communism where everybody is equal.....:bs:


----------



## SirRumpole (23 August 2016)

noco said:


> Down with democracy.....down with free speech.....down with the good way of life we once knew.
> 
> Up with communism where everybody is equal.....:bs:




Yes, yes, thanks noco, good of you to join us.

Time for a cuppa and a lie down now mate, you could use it.


----------



## noco (23 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, yes, thanks noco, good of you to join us.
> 
> Time for a cuppa and a lie down now mate, you could use it.




Thanks for be so honest in admitting you are a communist......I wish I had a Red Flag with the hammer and sickle to send you.

Communism : It ain't dead and buried while we have the little Billy Can is hanging around.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 August 2016)

noco said:


> Thanks for be so honest in admitting you are a communist......I wish I had a Red Flag with the hammer and sickle to send you.




Dream on little troll...


----------



## noco (23 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Dream on little troll...




Well I did mention communism and you asked me to join you so I thought you were confirming your political beliefs.

Bless you my son.:headshake


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2016)

So the LNP's personal palace guard are about to raid the ALP again over material that apparently lays bare Malcolm's performance with the failed NBN.

Let's hope there's a royal commission and all the players get to explain why so much money spent for so little gain to anyone except Telc0 shareholders and their executives.


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2016)

Mitch Fifield reckons the AFP are best placed to determine what their limits of jurisdiction is, not the govt !!!

What is wrong with the system when a political party encourages Caesar judging Caesar merely for the FTW. 

Personally I find Conroy loud and annoying, but setting the dogs on him because he's a wally is over OTT and contrary to the "Grown Up" pledge Malcolm mandated himself and his peers.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 August 2016)

Tisme said:


> So the LNP's personal palace guard are about to raid the ALP again over material that apparently lays bare Malcolm's performance with the failed NBN.
> 
> Let's hope there's a royal commission and all the players get to explain why so much money spent for so little gain to anyone except Telc0 shareholders and their executives.




No doubt the government would happily release any info that would embarrass the Labor Party. The NBN info isn't national security, it's what the public have a right to know, and should be available under Freedom of Information too.


----------



## noco (24 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> No doubt the government would happily release any info that would embarrass the Labor Party. The NBN info isn't national security, it's what the public have a right to know, and should be available under Freedom of Information too.




And of course the Labor Party don't jump on the same band wagon at every chance they get to embarrass the Liberal Party..Dreyfus is a past master at that caper.

Mud slinging is all a part of dirty politics for one to gain votes over the other.


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> No doubt the government would happily release any info that would embarrass the Labor Party. The NBN info isn't national security, it's what the public have a right to know, and should be available under Freedom of Information too.




Have to wonder what the prize is to them and what price it costs in public confidence that the nation is being run in the national interest.

It's behaviours like this that had me championing a fox in the hen house for the last election, but even with a withering voter base for both majors, the message is garbled when it hits their ears. Parliament is a pantheon of egotistical peoples who think they are Gods it seems..... Gough Whitlamesque clones.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 August 2016)

Tisme said:


> Have to wonder what the prize is to them and what price it costs in public confidence that the nation is being run in the national interest.
> .




Indeed, what do they keep telling us "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear"...


----------



## SirRumpole (26 August 2016)

Can Treasurer Scott Morrison's economic plan starve off recession?



> Treasurer Scott Morrison has outlined where he wants to steer the Australian economy through this term of parliament. So what are the risks and does the Treasurer's plan stack up?
> 
> Mr Morrison has emphasised Australia's growing mountain of debt and warned against economic complacency after 25 years of uninterrupted growth.
> 
> ...


----------



## drsmith (1 September 2016)

The government with such a slender majority in the Reps needs to be much better prepared for Labor hardball than this,



> The manoeuvre left the Government scrambling. It could must just 67 votes including two from non-coalition MPs.




https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/32507928/pm-suffers-first-defeat-in-new-parliament/#page1


----------



## qldfrog (2 September 2016)

Last night "defeat":
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/comment/inside-an-ambush-how-labor-created-history-on-the-floor-of-the-house-20160902-gr7eqs.html
How do you read this as a voter; one side is: it is fair and well played as a tactical game,
 the other is that maybe Australia needs something better that these preschool game plays done by politicians paid 100,000's  in a country which definitively needs major changes and reforms
The debt and country our children will inherit does not care whose side of politics we support...
Pathetic...


----------



## Tisme (3 September 2016)

qldfrog said:


> Last night "defeat":
> http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/comment/inside-an-ambush-how-labor-created-history-on-the-floor-of-the-house-20160902-gr7eqs.html
> How do you read this as a voter; one side is: it is fair and well played as a tactical game,
> the other is that maybe Australia needs something better that these preschool game plays done by politicians paid 100,000's  in a country which definitively needs major changes and reforms
> ...




Remember how Malcolm proclaimed a "grown up" leadership and as soon as the count was done the usual 4rseh0le cohorts jumped on the airways and started up with the same old insults against the Billy&Coy. So much for glasnost and perestroika. The Labor Party is made up of intellectuals; why the Libs think they can play viscous mind games with them is puzzling. 

I keep visualising Homer Simpson doing something inane and continuing to do it instead of learning the first time.

The Govt is supposed to govern and the opposition is supposed to oppose to keep the govt accountable.....Malcolm needs to get on and govern, even if that means negotiating with the enemy.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 September 2016)

Tisme said:


> .Malcolm needs to get on and govern, even if that means negotiating with the enemy.




Yes , even by adopting Labor's negative gearing and CGT reforms. That would improve the Budget bottom line by about $8 billion pa, if he's got the guts to do it.


----------



## Smurf1976 (3 September 2016)

Tisme said:


> The Govt is supposed to govern and the opposition is supposed to oppose to keep the govt accountable.....




Exactly. Has it somehow escaped Malcom's attention that Labor and the minor parties aren't supposed to automatically agree with government policy? If they do agree then it's somewhat coincidental that both sides have come up with the same solution to whatever the issue is. 

The Opposition is opposing - that's what they're supposed to do. Agree or disagree on any specific policy but without an effective opposition it's almost certain that we end up with poor governance and lack of accountability.

The government needs to get on an govern - that's what they're supposed to do and if that means finding some middle ground with others then so be it.


----------



## drsmith (3 September 2016)

qldfrog said:


> Last night "defeat":
> http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/comment/inside-an-ambush-how-labor-created-history-on-the-floor-of-the-house-20160902-gr7eqs.html
> How do you read this as a voter; one side is: it is fair and well played as a tactical game,
> the other is that maybe Australia needs something better that these preschool game plays done by politicians paid 100,000's  in a country which definitively needs major changes and reforms
> ...



A negative for both major parties but more so for the government as they are responsible for maintaining control of the Reps and obviously need to be much more disciplined in that regard given their slender majority.


----------



## noco (3 September 2016)

drsmith said:


> A negative for both major parties but more so for the government as they are responsible for maintaining control of the Reps and obviously need to be much more disciplined in that regard given their slender majority.




I would say who ever breaks ranks again will either face the back bench or will out on his/her ear.

Certainly a wake up call.


----------



## drsmith (3 September 2016)

The story as I read it was that before the end of the day in the Reps, a Labor member left and the Libs (Coalition more broadly) concluded that Labor wasn't going to pull such a stunt. That Labor member was called back on their way to Canberra Airport and it was game on. It's possible that was a ruse by Labor to give the Coalition a false sense of security on the day. 

I have no objection with individual parliamentarians not attending all of parliament or not being within reach of the chamber at the time of a division as their time may be better spent on issues related to their portfolio or constituency rather than sitting through procedural matters or issues not relevant to individual portfolios. It's essential however that the government retains control of the house and for that in this parliament, they all need to be there for the full sittings unless by prior arrangement with either the opposition or any independents.


----------



## orr (3 September 2016)

The prospect hardly bears thinking about, we've have all collectively dodged the bullet, the desolute horror and deprivation of the Australian people had of Labor's chicanery lead to a Royal Commission into the Banking industry. 

One may have had called it for what it would have been  for the Government ... a Glorious defeat.
this one ain't going away...

Blessed be that sword of Damocles...


----------



## moXJO (3 September 2016)

Tisme said:


> Malcolm needs to get on and govern, even if that means negotiating with the enemy.




Are you talking labor or Lib righties? 

TBULL is screwed either way.

Hey those labor intellectuals must have been out to lunch the past 25 years. Labor is run by Mr sock puppet "Whatever she said" himself.


----------



## pixel (3 September 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> Exactly. Has it somehow escaped Malcom's attention that Labor and the minor parties aren't supposed to automatically agree with government policy? If they do agree then it's somewhat coincidental that both sides have come up with the same solution to whatever the issue is.
> 
> The Opposition is opposing - that's what they're supposed to do. Agree or disagree on any specific policy but without an effective opposition it's almost certain that we end up with poor governance and lack of accountability.



Spot-on! They've tried already to shirk accountability by declaring everything refugee and detention camp-related as State Secret. That's a sure way into Dictatorship and Suppression.


> The government needs to get on an govern - that's what they're supposed to do and if that means finding some middle ground with others then so be it.




Abso-bluddy-lutely!
Calling on the Opposition to rubberstamp government proposals smacks of hypocrisy. If that's what the LibNats think an Opposition is supposed to do, how come they didn't tell Abbott to do the same when the shoe was on the other foot? They can't all have such short memories?


----------



## Smurf1976 (3 September 2016)

orr said:


> The prospect hardly bears thinking about, we've have all collectively dodged the bullet, the desolute horror and deprivation of the Australian people had of Labor's chicanery lead to a Royal Commission into the Banking industry.




If the banking industry has nothing to hide then what's the problem with a Royal Commission into it?

There's a political side to it all obviously, but if there's nothing to hide then there's nothing to fear from being investigated. Much the same if the ATO audits your taxes or the Police randomly pull me over and want to see what's in the boot when I'm driving - so long as there's no corruption in the process (and there sure shouldn't be in the case of a Royal Commission) then there's nothing to fear if someone wants to have a look to make sure everything's as it's supposed to be.

All the fuss about a banking Royal Commission leads me to believe that there probably is something to hide. If there wasn't then the simplest way to clear any doubts would be to go ahead with it, after which the government could point out that Labor was wrong all along.


----------



## noco (3 September 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> If the banking industry has nothing to hide then what's the problem with a Royal Commission into it?
> 
> There's a political side to it all obviously, but if there's nothing to hide then there's nothing to fear from being investigated. Much the same if the ATO audits your taxes or the Police randomly pull me over and want to see what's in the boot when I'm driving - so long as there's no corruption in the process (and there sure shouldn't be in the case of a Royal Commission) then there's nothing to fear if someone wants to have a look to make sure everything's as it's supposed to be.
> 
> All the fuss about a banking Royal Commission leads me to believe that there probably is something to hide. If there wasn't then the simplest way to clear any doubts would be to go ahead with it, after which the government could point out that Labor was wrong all along.




Labor is raving  on  about the cost of a Gay Marriage plebiscite, but they don't talk about the cost of a RC into banking which could run for a couple of years and cost how much?......The banking industry is regulated and the banks know the watch dog is onto them.....Sure there are a couple of rotten eggs in the banking system who give the wrong advice and some people get their fingers burnt just like any other financial adviser.....One thing that needs to be straightened out  is the way some farmers are being treated. 

If the stupid Labor Party had not sold off the Commonwealth in the first place, any government could have used the Commonwealth  to control the banking industry with competition...That was the whole idea of a government owned bank.

If there is a RC into banking what will be gained from it?......Plenty of legal eagles will be rubbing their hands together with glee......There will be plenty of money to fill their pockets.


----------



## Logique (5 September 2016)

The hoped for banking royal commission is just payback for the unions royal commission isn't it?  In any case the suits would make expensive mince-meat of the Senators. Those who were awake, yes I'm looking at you Derryn.  

Bolt is at it again. Niki Savva will be incandescent. 


> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...s/news-story/1a42df5c27eb76a6b2cf49e3133588ea
> Andrew Bolt - How I found Turnbull's two fatal flaws - Herald Sun, September 4, 2016
> 
> ...Seemingly keen to impress me, he’d [Turnbull] shown me on his laptop how he could sign me up to his mailing list there and then — but once he’d started typing he could not stop, and fiddled away for the rest of the meeting...


----------



## noco (7 September 2016)

Logique said:


> The hoped for banking royal commission is just payback for the unions royal commission isn't it?  In any case the suits would make expensive mince-meat of the Senators. Those who were awake, yes I'm looking at you Derryn.
> 
> Bolt is at it again. Niki Savva will be incandescent.




My belief is Labor want a RC into the banking system in the hope that something derogatively will arise to give them the excuse to nationalize the banks as part of their Socialist agenda.

I have been saying for years now Socialism is all about central control.......Control the media first as they have done with the ABC and SBS to brainwash people with their propaganda, next control the banks followed by mining, agriculture and manufacturing or what is left of it after the unions have done a good job in destroying it.

If Labor had not sold off the Commonwealth bank, the government of the day could have controlled the banking system by competition.


----------



## Tisme (7 September 2016)

moXJO said:


> Are you talking labor or Lib righties?
> 
> TBULL is screwed either way.
> 
> Hey those labor intellectuals must have been out to lunch the past 25 years. Labor is run by Mr sock puppet "Whatever she said" himself.




Good points. 

Turnbull is supposedly a paragon of business acumen. If that is true he would have learned how to suck up the personal disagreeable and negotiate the best for his company's side of the equation. Any of the political machinations found in Canberra translate into corporate enterprise ... those who have worn those higher positions have a fairly accurate prediction modelling going on in their heads. 

My personal assessment of Turnbull, since he threw off his red bandana and started wearing a blue riband, is that he is an accidental tourist. Even extremely clever people like Lord Viscount Rumpole argued the toss with me on that one many years ago; I'm guessing because no political party could be that stupid. 

The ALP intellectuals, well in the absence of mental stimulation comes a need to champion something, anything to break the monotony of knowing everything that's  best for society; a peculiar gene that demands a nanny state.


----------



## Tisme (7 September 2016)

noco said:


> My belief is Labor want a RC into the banking system in the hope that something derogatively will arise to give them the excuse to nationalize the banks as part of their Socialist agenda.
> 
> I have been saying for years now Socialism is all about central control.......Control the media first as they have done with the ABC and SBS to brainwash people with their propaganda, next control the banks followed by mining, agriculture and manufacturing or what is left of it after the unions have done a good job in destroying it.
> 
> If Labor had not sold off the Commonwealth bank, the government of the day could have controlled the banking system by competition.




I never picked you as a closet socialist Noco? Nationalism of banks, utilities, essential services is the antithesis of the Liberal Party mantra and amended neo constitution. Anything that smells of Labor is a bad bad thing.


First rule of Royal Commissions : find the smoking gun and hide it for the commissioners to rediscover. The ALP know hat they are doing and so do the running scared Libs


----------



## SirRumpole (7 September 2016)

Tisme said:


> Good points.
> 
> Even extremely clever people like Lord Viscount Rumpole argued the toss with me on that one many years ago; I'm guessing because no political party could be that stupid.




I assumed he could run his Party instead of his Party running him.


----------



## Tisme (7 September 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I assumed he could run his Party instead of his Party running him.




Yeah well  "wrong" is always a bitter pill .... so I'm told.


----------



## sptrawler (7 September 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I assumed he could run his Party instead of his Party running him.




Most Liberal voters new better, it was only the media and Laborites, that thought Malcolm was the mesiah.

Remember all the people saying "I would vote Liberal, if Turnbull was in charge", what a joke.lol


----------



## qldfrog (7 September 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Most Liberal voters new better, it was only the media and Laborites, that thought Malcolm was the mesiah.
> 
> Remember all the people saying "I would vote Liberal, if Turnbull was in charge", what a joke.lol



I did and would not have voted Abbott.Why do you think the LNP still has ..kind of...a majority???


----------



## sptrawler (7 September 2016)

qldfrog said:


> I did and would not have voted Abbott.Why do you think the LNP still has ..kind of...a majority???




They fell over the line, because Turnbull had only been leader for a short period, next election will be more definitive.

He can't keep wobbling along in the current vein, lacking vision and purpose, it isn't confidence inspiring.:1zhelp:

Silly Billy is starting to look believable, which in itself is unbelievable, it just shows how badly Malcolm is performing.IMO


----------



## qldfrog (7 September 2016)

sptrawler said:


> He can't keep wobbling along in the current vein, lacking vision and purpose, it isn't confidence inspiring.:1zhelp:
> 
> Silly Billy is starting to look believable, which in itself is unbelievable, it just shows how badly Malcolm is performing.IMO



True, but maybe the LNP should wake up and do a bit of proper work instead of knifing MT in the back;
otherwise we WILL get Bill...


----------



## SirRumpole (8 September 2016)

Malcolm Turnbull indicates he is open to political donations reform following Sam Dastyari furore


Lets hope he can convince the rest of his party to go along with reform.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-...open-changing-political-donations-law/7826060


----------



## Tisme (9 September 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Malcolm Turnbull indicates he is open to political donations reform following Sam Dastyari furore
> 
> 
> Lets hope he can convince the rest of his party to go along with reform.
> ...





Remember that wedding the libs went to and tried it on getting the debt paid for by you and me?

Shakespeare comes to mind when pigs with their snouts in the trough start squealing about piglets  doing the same.

The Libs got $65k from the same bloke,!!!


----------



## moXJO (9 September 2016)

Sam Dastyari flashed up on the TV while I was talking to a Chinese friend fob. He exclaimed with excitement "I didn't know Mr Bean was in Australia!"


----------



## Tisme (9 September 2016)

Anna Wu Meijuan	2013-14	$50,000	Liberal Party (WA branch)	Wu is the company secretary for Yuhu Investment Holdings

Same company different political party


----------



## Tisme (9 September 2016)

*Yuhu Group*	2013-14	$425,000	Liberal Party (various branches)	Former NSW treasurer Eric Roozendaal joined the group in 2014. It is also donated $20,000 to the Liberal Party the following year.

*So that was 425 + 20 + 50 = $495,000 to Liberal party and $1670 to Sam Dastyari from the same communist business man.*


----------



## moXJO (9 September 2016)

Tisme said:


> *Yuhu Group*	2013-14	$425,000	Liberal Party (various branches)	Former NSW treasurer Eric Roozendaal joined the group in 2014. It is also donated $20,000 to the Liberal Party the following year.
> 
> *So that was 425 + 20 + 50 = $495,000 to Liberal party and $1670 to Sam Dastyari from the same communist business man.*




One is party donations to get elected and then provide favors. The other was a direct personal contribution into his back pocket for future personal snack pack spending.


----------



## qldfrog (9 September 2016)

Tisme said:


> *Yuhu Group*	2013-14	$425,000	Liberal Party (various branches)	Former NSW treasurer Eric Roozendaal joined the group in 2014. It is also donated $20,000 to the Liberal Party the following year.
> 
> *So that was 425 + 20 + 50 = $495,000 to Liberal party and $1670 to Sam Dastyari from the same communist business man.*



to be fair, the 1670$ corrupt dollar was the only amount required on this junket expedition as the australian taxpayers were footing the rest/most of the bill, not sure I would not have prefered the amount "donated" to be higher and my taxes used more appropriately.
This country needs a revolution, not labour/LNP swaps


----------



## Tisme (9 September 2016)

qldfrog said:


> to be fair, the 1670$ corrupt dollar was the only amount required on this junket expedition as the australian taxpayers were footing the rest/most of the bill, not sure I would not have prefered the amount "donated" to be higher and my taxes used more appropriately.
> This country needs a revolution, not labour/LNP swaps




Nation needs to boycott the news media and let the parliament get on with the corruption and backdoor deals that built our great nation.


----------



## qldfrog (9 September 2016)

Tisme said:


> Nation needs to boycott the news media and let the parliament get on with the corruption and backdoor deals that built our great nation.



In the best of Tisme spirit 
if of interest, much (easy to know) truth there:
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/malcolm-turnbulls-challenge-one-year-on-is-to-be-bold-and-take-on-critics-20160909-grctgq.html


----------



## luutzu (9 September 2016)

Tisme said:


> Nation needs to boycott the news media and let the parliament get on with the corruption and backdoor deals that built our great nation.




What made you think the media aren't already doing that? Maybe this what's his name is just a sacrificial lamb. You know, keeping up appearances.


----------



## luutzu (9 September 2016)

Tisme said:


> Anna Wu Meijuan	2013-14	$50,000	Liberal Party (WA branch)	Wu is the company secretary for Yuhu Investment Holdings
> 
> Same company different political party




Gotta pay both ways.

I mean, when the Lib or Lab party accountant look up your loyalty, they'd only be looking into their own payPal database.


----------



## luutzu (9 September 2016)

qldfrog said:


> to be fair, the 1670$ corrupt dollar was the only amount required on this junket expedition as the australian taxpayers were footing the rest/most of the bill, not sure I would not have prefered the amount "donated" to be higher and my taxes used more appropriately.
> This country needs a revolution, not labour/LNP swaps




I wonder how the senior comrades feel when they finds out the guy claims he gave more than $1670 to Sammy. Somebody's gonna get a good talking to.


----------



## Tink (11 October 2016)

The rights of CFA volunteers have been enshrined in law.

In a late night session on Monday, federal parliament passed amendments to the Fair Work Act, with the majority of Senate crossbenchers supporting the Coalition.

The Turnbull Government was supported by the Nick Xenophon Team and One Nation Party, as well as Derryn Hinch and David Leyonhjelm.

The vote was 37 to 31.

The government says it has delivered on an election propose to protect Victoria's Country Fire Authority from a hostile union takeover.

The changes aim to protect emergency service volunteers, so that any enterprise agreements cannot include terms that restrict them from carrying out their duties.


----------



## Tisme (14 October 2016)

Not being a Lib tragic, I can see the concern and this from the Libs own b4st4rd child.:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-...redible-path-back-to-surplus-ipa-says/7382316



> A leading free market think tank has lashed the Turnbull budget, saying it offers no credible path back to surplus and has permanently entrenched big government.
> 
> The executive director of the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA), John Roskam, sent an email to members last night saying "the size of government will have grown by nearly 10 per cent in the course of just over a decade".
> 
> "That's unsustainable. That heads us down the path of European-style economics," he wrote.


----------



## noco (14 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> Not being a Lib tragic, I can see the concern and this from the Libs own b4st4rd child.:
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-...redible-path-back-to-surplus-ipa-says/7382316




You cherry picked and avoided in adding the following.

*"That's unsustainable. That heads us down the path of European-style economics," he wrote.

"If Labor win the election the situation will be even worse."
*
"T*:headshake:nono:*


----------



## Tisme (15 October 2016)

noco said:


> You cherry picked and avoided in adding the following.
> 
> *"That's unsustainable. That heads us down the path of European-style economics," he wrote.
> 
> ...





Said the fly to the spider LOL


----------



## noco (15 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> Said the fly to the spider LOL




It is amazing how some people get caught up in their web.


----------



## Tisme (15 October 2016)

> The very reason Malcolm Turnbull rose to the top job and Scott Morrison was elevated to Treasurer was the promise of “new economic leadership”.
> Yet 12 months on and Australians are shaking their heads – despite all the talk about jobs and growth, the scorecard is far from “so far so good”.
> On the economic front, wages growth has slowed to new record lows over the last year putting household budgets under pressure while total investment in the economy has fallen by more than 10 per cent since September 2015.
> And it would seem Malcolm Turnbull’s economic leadership was only warming up after a few months in the job.
> ...




http://tinyurl.com/gtl9uzw


----------



## SirRumpole (15 October 2016)

> On the economic front, *wages growth has slowed to new record lows over the last* year putting household budgets under pressure while total investment in the economy has fallen by more than 10 per cent since September 2015.




That's what you get when you bring another 200,000 people into the country _every year_, an over supply of labour leading to depressed wages growth. Are ther any economists in this government ? This government is all about trying to please business by giving them more customers via higher immigration, but they have shot themselves in the foot.




> But *despite Australia’s growing population the number of full-time jobs has actually collapsed by 64,000 since the beginning of the year.*




It's more like *because* of the growing population. People can't get jobs and therefore don't spend money. It's about time the government did something for the people already here and  stopped flooding the country with people we don't need. (See the Population thread for the views of a leading bank economist).



> That’s a loss of 300 full-time jobs each and every day since the beginning of the year.
> No wonder people aren’t feeling secure in their employment under the new economic team.
> And who can forget the stumbles from the Prime Minister on economic reform, from wanting to increase the GST, to then wanting to re-introduce state income taxes through “the most fundamental reform to the federation in generation”, something that barely lasted 48 hours.
> And if this wasn’t enough, Mr Turnbull along with Mr Morrison became the first Prime Minister and Treasurer to be rolled in Cabinet since the 1970s, as it was revealed the Immigration Minister rolled them on plans to reform negative gearing. This confirmed – as if Australians didn’t already know – that the Prime Minister has also managed to sell out the aspirations of young first home buyers right across the country.
> After 12 months of misfires and missteps it is clear the Prime Minister is unable to deliver the economic leadership the country needs.




Turnbull seems bereft of ideas. There have been too many lawyers running the country. Lets get back to the real world.


----------



## noco (15 October 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> That's what you get when you bring another 200,000 people into the country _every year_, an over supply of labour leading to depressed wages growth. Are ther any economists in this government ? This government is all about trying to please business by giving them more customers via higher immigration, but they have shot themselves in the foot.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Firstly, we did not need 50,000 illegal boat people who arrived with Labor's open door policy 2007/2013.....Most of whom are illiterate and unskilled and still on social security......Some now have 3 wives and 17 kids so they don't have to work which means you and I are paying for their luxury living....And I agree with Pauline Hanson stop further immigration into this country in particular Muslims. 

Secondly, the current government want to limit immigration to less than 20,000.....Labor has a target of 35,000 and the Greens have a target of 50,000 from war torn ME.

It would appear on average that wages have been depressed and the reason I believe is mainly caused by the reduction in wages to those working in the mines.....Mining has slowed due to the state of commodity prices.
During the mining boom it was difficult to get skilled labour and consequently mining companies had to pay very high wages to entice workers to the various sites....Some were FIFO and some domiciled on site......Much of the work was carried out by contractors......An example is my next door neighbor who works at a mine near Mt Isa.....Tenders were called last August and a new contractor  wins the work.....My neighbor's services  were terminated by the previous contractor and then reengaged by the new contractor who then offered to reemploy my neighbor but the wage offer was some 30% less....Mind you he tells me he is still earning good wages.......He is a FIFO worker.....one week on and one week off with 12 hour daily shifts.

I read somewhere, where the unemployed is now at 5.6 % and has slowly been in declined for the past 2 years....There are thousands of jobs waiting in two coal mines in Queensland which are about to get off the ground and further more Collinsville  has recently as last week reopened their coal mine employing 200 workers.

I think it is about time the Green/Labor coalition admitted to having caused a lot of our problems 2007/2013 and are who are now hell bent on obstructing any economic reform just to make the government look bad.....The increase in the GST to 15% is one  answer but you could bet your boots it would never get through the senate.....Keating wanted to impose a GST back in the 90's and Hawke would not allow it because he said it would be political suicide...Chris Bowen had the same idea to increase the GST and several models were were under consideration....I doubt Bowen would have had the balls to implement it for the same reason that Hawke gave...The fear of losing votes.  

So I think a little bit of fairness should enter the equation rather than place all the blame on the current government.......As one prominent Labor MP once stated....."WHAT EVER IT TAKES".


----------



## SirRumpole (15 October 2016)

> Secondly, the current government want to limit immigration to less than 20,000.....Labor has a target of 35,000 and the Greens have a target of 50,000 from war torn ME.




You are talking about refugees only. The rate of migration from all sources has been 200,000 per year since Howard's day. The wage stagnation data shows that we have exceeded the capacity of the economy to create jobs for the population we have got and it's time to slow down the influx.


----------



## Tisme (15 October 2016)

I think it's important to consider the farce behind what is deemed employment:



> 2.34 Employed are defined as people aged 15 and over who, during the reference week:
> worked for one hour or more for pay, profit, commission or payment in kind, in a job or business or on a farm (comprising employees, employers and own account workers); or
> worked for one hour or more without pay in a family business or on a farm (i.e. contributing family workers); or
> were employees who had a job but were not at work and were:
> ...


----------



## Tisme (15 October 2016)

Someone flip this guy a nickel so he can buy a clue, maybe two nickels and they can buy one for the NBN too:




> "The South Australian Government's conscious policy to drive baseload energy out of the system meant the system collapsed further and faster than it would otherwise have done and recovered far more slowly than it should have."






http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-...y-exacerbated-blackout-greg-hunt-says/7897298


----------



## SirRumpole (15 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> I think it's important to consider the farce behind what is deemed employment:




Yes, the unemployment data is a farce. Do one hour of work a week and you are not unemployed.

The measure should be people who are available to work a 35 hour week but cannot get those hours.


----------



## McLovin (15 October 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, the unemployment data is a farce. Do one hour of work a week and you are not unemployed.
> 
> The measure should be people who are available to work a 35 hour week but cannot get those hours.




Underemployment is measured if you care to look.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 October 2016)

McLovin said:


> Underemployment is measured if you care to look.




You are correct, thanks for pointing that out.



> August 2016
> 
> TREND ESTIMATES (MONTHLY CHANGE)
> 
> ...






Funny how politicians never mention underemployment, they take the figures that best suit themselves.


----------



## Ves (15 October 2016)

McLovin said:


> Underemployment is measured if you care to look.



Reckon if you keep pointing this out someone will remember it eventually?


----------



## SirRumpole (15 October 2016)

Ves said:


> Reckon if you keep pointing this out someone will remember it eventually?




You mean the politicians ? I've never heard any of them mention it.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 October 2016)

Looks like under employment s finally getting some notice in the general media.




> Unemployment rate only telling half the labour market story
> By business reporter Michael Janda
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (19 October 2016)

There is one way to put a stop to BHP's tax avoidance

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-17/there-is-one-way-to-put-a-stop-to-bhp-tax-avoidance/7939766


----------



## qldfrog (19 October 2016)

Ves said:


> Reckon if you keep pointing this out someone will remember it eventually?



I got my lessons about that one , and the figures match my gut feel.


----------



## IFocus (22 October 2016)

I always knew Abbot was a tosser (as many here will remember me repeating ad nauseum) but his form now surely is starting to eclipse Rudds bitter revenge against those that dethroned him.

He still practices the shoot my mouth of get caught lying then proceeds to blow both his feet off while having that stupid smile.

His undermining of Turnbull is now a daily practice will he eventually bring down the government?


----------



## drsmith (22 October 2016)

IFocus said:


> I always knew Abbot was a tosser (as many here will remember me repeating ad nauseum) but his form now surely is starting to eclipse Rudds bitter revenge against those that dethroned him.
> 
> He still practices the shoot my mouth of get caught lying then proceeds to blow both his feet off while having that stupid smile.
> 
> His undermining of Turnbull is now a daily practice will he eventually bring down the government?



Poor old Tones has lost the plot and judging by the past week, he'll burn himself out well before the next election.

He should have left politics at the last election by the latest. He could have then exited with at least the dignity of having under his government stopped the asylum seeker boats that were started under the Rudd government.


----------



## explod (23 October 2016)

Equally with the bad Unions we need to be rid of the corruption of the Government in bed with the wealthy. Paul from Get up puts the situation well.



> Yesterday morning, I stood with dozens of GetUp members and fronted the media with a message: it's time to get Big Money out of politics.
> 
> We were speaking outside the Four Seasons luxury hotel in Sydney. Inside, behind closed doors, Prime Minister Turnbull and NSW Liberal Party elites were rubbing shoulders with corporate bigwigs and fossil fuel magnates.
> 
> ...


----------



## noco (23 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> Said the fly to the spider LOL




I think you might call that a snide remark....


----------



## Tisme (23 October 2016)

noco said:


> I think you might call that a snide remark....




I call that a cliche, .........go figure


----------



## noco (23 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> I call that a cliche, .........go figure




I will stay with my own opinion.


----------



## Tisme (24 October 2016)

noco said:


> I will stay with my own opinion.





You should probably focus on the couple of snide Nigel Nobodies here who delight in sticking the sociopathic knife in, thinking they are playing some kind of mental chess with unsuspecting victims. This would take a leap of faith on your part to discriminate between politics, friendship and ar4eholes.


If I post things like "said the spider to the fly", you are supposed to share the humour, not feel victimised.

Honestly DILLIGAF ?


----------



## noco (24 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> You should probably focus on the couple of snide Nigel Nobodies here who delight in sticking the sociopathic knife in, thinking they are playing some kind of mental chess with unsuspecting victims. This would take a leap of faith on your part to discriminate between politics, friendship and ar4eholes.
> 
> 
> If I post things like "said the spider to the fly", you are supposed to share the humour, not feel victimised.
> ...




You were caught out leaving off the part about Labor being worse...You cherry picked.

Then you come up with all this hyperbolical megalomaniac rhetoric to cover your back side.


----------



## Tisme (24 October 2016)

noco said:


> You were caught out leaving off the part about Labor being worse...You cherry picked.
> 
> Then you come up with all this hyperbolical megalomaniac rhetoric to cover your back side.




LOL. 

Mate I bet you voted Labor more than I have (which wouldn't be hard). Come on admit it you are one of those born again Liberals aren't you? There's nothing worse than someone who has found the light seeking forgiveness for past sins.

This thread is "Turnbull Govt" or lack thereof isn't it? 

You Labor/Greenie trolls are all the same, but I can spot you.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 October 2016)

What I've been saying for months...

Underemployment phenomenon emerges with rise of part-time workforce



> Jobs and growth. Such a simple mantra. And yet a promise so difficult to deliver.
> 
> The trend, as we witnessed with the jobs numbers last week, is now undeniable.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tisme (24 October 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What I've been saying for months...
> 
> Underemployment phenomenon emerges with rise of part-time workforce




Yeah but you didn't cut through to the opinion leaders in the media like some are able to do . It's now the new black,for a short time at least. Just think of yourself as the innovator = big effort, zip reward.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> Just think of yourself as the innovator = big effort, zip reward.




Sadly yes, this seems to be my miserable lot in life.


----------



## Ves (24 October 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> What I've been saying for months...
> 
> Underemployment phenomenon emerges with rise of part-time workforce



What proportion of those who have transitioned from full time to part time hours are doing it out of choice vs.  those who have been forced to due to changing industry conditions or something else?

For example,  if I had enough assets or my expenses reduced (eg. kids left home) I may consider working less hours each week.  I can see this being a win/win for some employees and their employers.

Obviously not everyone will be able to do it by choice.  Or even want to.

I see it was a bit of a double edged sword.  Extra flexibility is great.  But not in cases where it's a forced decision disguised as flexibility.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 October 2016)

Ves said:


> What proportion of those who have transitioned from full time to part time hours are doing it out of choice vs.  those who have been forced to due to changing industry conditions or something else?
> 
> For example,  if I had enough assets or my expenses reduced (eg. kids left home) I may consider working less hours each week.  I can see this being a win/win for some employees and their employers.
> 
> Obviously not everyone will be able to do it by choice.  Or even want to.






> Underemployed workers are defined as part-time workers who *want, and are available* for more hours of work than they currently have, and full-time workers who worked part-time hours during the reference week for economic reasons (such as being stood down or insufficient work being available).
> 
> http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6265.0




So it looks like the voluntary part timers are not included in the underemployment stats.


----------



## Ves (24 October 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> So it looks like the voluntary part timers are not included in the underemployment stats.



There must be an unmeasured segment of the labour force then.


----------



## noco (24 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> LOL.
> 
> Mate I bet you voted Labor more than I have (which wouldn't be hard). Come on admit it you are one of those born again Liberals aren't you? There's nothing worse than someone who has found the light seeking forgiveness for past sins.
> 
> ...




It is me to know and you to find out......Good luck with that....The bait you are using is old and smelly...Suggest you try a fresh one.
:cuckoo:


----------



## Tisme (24 October 2016)

noco said:


> It is me to know and you to find out......Good luck with that....The bait you are using is old and smelly...Suggest you try a fresh one.
> :cuckoo:




You recognise your own ineffective bait then. There's hope yet.


----------



## noco (24 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> You recognise your own ineffective bait then. There's hope yet.




More crappy rhetoric..You are really something aren't you?


----------



## Tisme (25 October 2016)

Latest drama with Attorney General versus Solicitor General is very reminiscent of Walter Sofronoff V Tim Carmody in QLD a couple of years ago.

It seems the LNP is not one to allow too much separation pf powers and independence of advice.


----------



## Tisme (25 October 2016)

noco said:


> More crappy rhetoric..You are really something aren't you?




Thankyou for that unnecessary, but well deserved compliment IMHO. Your mea culpa is acceptable.


----------



## McLovin (25 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> Latest drama with Attorney General versus Solicitor General is very reminiscent of Walter Sofronoff V Tim Carmody in QLD a couple of years ago.
> 
> It seems the LNP is not one to allow too much separation pf powers and independence of advice.




In a case of civil servant v politician who spent $10k outfitting his office with books courtesy of the taxpayer, I'll back the civil servant every time.


----------



## Ves (25 October 2016)

McLovin said:


> In a case of civil servant v politician who spent $10k outfitting his office with books courtesy of the taxpayer, I'll back the civil servant every time.



But no sign of Meta Data for Dummies.

Old 'Bungles' Brandis is our very best example of a post turtle.


----------



## McLovin (25 October 2016)

Ves said:


> But no sign of Meta Data for Dummies.
> 
> Old 'Bungles' Brandis is our very best example of a post turtle.




Ha! Had to look that up, very funny.


----------



## Tisme (25 October 2016)

Ves said:


> But no sign of Meta Data for Dummies.
> 
> Old 'Bungles' Brandis is our very best example of a post turtle.




I gotta feel for the Poms when he replaces Alex Downer.  Actually I don't really feel for the poms at all


----------



## McLovin (25 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> I gotta feel for the Poms when he replaces Alex Downer.  Actually I don't really feel for the poms at all




I'm sure they'd rather Brandis than Downer with his second class Englishman affected accent (just like his old man).


----------



## Tisme (25 October 2016)

McLovin said:


> I'm sure they'd rather Brandis than Downer with his second class Englishman affected accent (just like his old man).




I say wot! A Radley School old boy?


----------



## McLovin (25 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> I say wot! A Radley School old boy?




My grandfather used to mix in polite circles in Mayfair back then, and used to tell me how Sir Alick would cringingly tug at the forelock of the upper class, desperate for acceptance. That awful accent of Downer Jnr seems to be cut from the same mould. Radley or not.


----------



## Tisme (25 October 2016)

As usual Chris Pyne on "Insiders" blames Labor for the Liberal Party's in fighting and woes. God help us all if they ever take responsibility for their own accountability.




> Malcolm Turnbull is now less popular than Tony Abbott at the time he was dumped, with the prime minister's satisfaction rating just 29 per cent in a new poll.
> 
> In Tuesday's Newspoll in The Australian, Mr Turnbull's support is below Mr Abbott's final approval rating of 30 per cent in September 2015.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tisme (25 October 2016)

McLovin said:


> My grandfather used to mix in polite circles in Mayfair back then, and used to tell me how Sir Alick would cringingly tug at the forelock of the upper class, desperate for acceptance. That awful accent of Downer Jnr seems to be cut from the same mould. Radley or not.




It is an accent I'm vaguely familiar with ...Sussex I think ... I dunno, but it's a whiney sound for sure. Chris Pyne is another with a cultivated annoyance.


----------



## McLovin (25 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> It is an accent I'm vaguely familiar with ...Sussex I think ... I dunno, but it's a whiney sound for sure. Chris Pyne is another with a cultivated annoyance.




It's a South Australian affliction, but Downer and Pyne seem to ham it up. I doubt they're speaking like they're from the home counties when they're ordering a pie floater on Rundle Mall at 3am after having a skinful.


----------



## Tisme (25 October 2016)

McLovin said:


> It's a South Australian affliction, but Downer and Pyne seem to ham it up. I doubt they're speaking like they're from the home counties when they're ordering a pie floater on Rundle Mall at 3am after having a skinful.




  .....


----------



## sptrawler (25 October 2016)

It is weird that the Country is in a fiscal and social crisis, yet all the press wants to talk about is the "census debacle", the "plebiscite on gay marriage" and the solicitor general.

Shame the useless media, can't actually do some in depth reporting, on how we will pay our bills, or how we will stop escalating violence in society.

We must have the most useless, incompetent, media in the world. IMO

Cheap senseless headline hunting garbage, while the ship sinks, because everyone has to be politically correct and say FA.:1zhelp:

At least we have the the right person at the helm, of the ruder less ship.

My rant for the month


----------



## Tisme (30 October 2016)

https://medium.com/@TimJDunlop/six-...olitics-at-the-moment-5f8c9316311f#.y62i35tsg



> Six quick thoughts about Australian politics at the moment
> 
> 1. What currently stands in the way of a better future?
> The issue of leadership struggles within the government ”” that is, between Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull ”” is now irrelevant. Turnbull has won the leadership battle and Abbott has won the policy battle. Turnbull has abandoned the pretence of mild progressivism that used to be his “brand” and is pursuing a rightwing agenda with the zealousness of the convert. Get used to it. The right wing of the Liberal Party, in coopting Turnbull to their policy prescriptions, has ensured they have put the most politically popular face they have on their agenda (yes, I know, Turnbull’s poll numbers are now lower than Abbott’s but that doesn’t mean Abbott would fair better than Turnbull if, by chance, he happened to regain the leadership). So expect less internal disruption, not more, despite the odd bit of Abbott grandstanding. The gig is up: Malcolm is one of them.
> ...


----------



## moXJO (30 October 2016)

Who cares.
The snotty little turds are out of the 24/h news cycle. Bill Shorten keeps trying to get his dopey looking mug on camera but no one cares what he is saying.


----------



## Tisme (31 October 2016)

Man who sold Darwin military wharves to China accepts lagniappe position with Chinese communists. Andrew Robb proves once again that lauded Australian politicians can be bottom feeders.


----------



## SirRumpole (31 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> Man who sold Darwin military wharves to China accepts lagniappe position with Chinese communists. Andrew Robb proves once again that lauded Australian politicians can be bottom feeders.




It's inappropriate imo for an ex Cabinet Minister who had access to confidential information to be in such a position with a company whose government is not one of our allies. It create a whole lot of conflict of interest questions about whether Robb could be manipulated or tricked into giving up information on government operations or policy.

Not only does it give rise to concerns that Robb helped negotiate the deal for his own benefit, it's a potential threat to our national security and the government should do something about it.


----------



## orr (31 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> Man who sold Darwin military wharves to China accepts lagniappe position with Chinese communists. Andrew Robb proves once again that lauded Australian politicians can be bottom feeders.




Dastyari in the pillory for weeks over a restaurant bill being picked up by the 'Red Menace,' Now we have Robb being shoehorned into some corporate couch and on what sort of renumeration??? by the 'Commo Carpet baggers' to the adulation of his parasitic brethren. Is Lord Haw-Haw still out giving private tutoring and training lectures.

Standard fair for the imbecilic rabble that constitutes this short lived government... 'IPA'(silly Jimmy) Patterson; I rest my case.


----------



## Tisme (31 October 2016)

orr said:


> Dastyari in the pillory for weeks over a restaurant bill being picked up by the 'Red Menace,' Now we have Robb being shoehorned into some corporate couch and on what sort of renumeration??? by the 'Commo Carpet baggers' to the adulation of his parasitic brethren. Is Lord Haw-Haw still out giving private tutoring and training lectures.
> 
> Standard fair for the imbecilic rabble that constitutes this short lived government... 'IPA'(silly Jimmy) Patterson; I rest my case.




Be interesting to see if Conroy jumped ship to China too


----------



## SirRumpole (1 November 2016)

Andrew Robb under fire for decision to work for Chinese company Landbridge


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-...ole-criticised-by-defence-association/7981832


----------



## Tisme (1 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Andrew Robb under fire for decision to work for Chinese company Landbridge
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-...ole-criticised-by-defence-association/7981832




This works well for Tony's tilt to retake the leadership.


----------



## Tisme (2 November 2016)

The solicitor general resigns, but the govt continues to accept Bob Day's vote in the senate, knowing a black cloud was hanging over his legitimacy to hold his seat. Must be Labor's fault.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> The solicitor general resigns, but the govt continues to accept Bob Day's vote in the senate, knowing a black cloud was hanging over his legitimacy to hold his seat. Must be Labor's fault.




So what happens if he was ineligible ? They can't have a by election for the Senate so who decides who gets the seat ?

Here is one opinion on that.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-02/bob-day-high-court-case-would-set-a-legal-precedent/7986660


----------



## Tisme (2 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> So what happens if he was ineligible ? They can't have a by election for the Senate so who decides who gets the seat ?
> 
> Here is one opinion on that.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-02/bob-day-high-court-case-would-set-a-legal-precedent/7986660




That will be for nought because the Libs have already invaded the ABC Radio Canberra and made it clear Bill Shorten is to blame .... my crystal ball is working well.

I'd like to know when Labor will finally relinquish their sovereignty and hand the keys to the Libs and News Corp to govern (with good governance).


----------



## Tisme (3 November 2016)

While the govt is busy trying to force a hung parliament and get us back to the polls by invalidating election results, maybe they could give the Magrathea chestnut some traction and get rid of Tony too, even if the docs are Cam Smith  fake:


----------



## SirRumpole (3 November 2016)

"We are not the Labor Party" said Tony Abbott, aka Kevin Rudd.


----------



## Logique (3 November 2016)

The Turnbull Government's near term agenda is in tatters.  There is no guarantee of a sympathetic replacement for Senator for Bob Day. 

And the WA One Nation Senator was technically illegally elected, he still had the offence showing on his record at the time.


----------



## Knobby22 (3 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> While the govt is busy trying to force a hung parliament and get us back to the polls by invalidating election results, maybe they could give the Magrathea chestnut some traction and get rid of Tony too, even if the docs are Cam Smith  fake:
> 
> View attachment 68680
> 
> ...




 Tony is a British citizen (dual). Plenty of Australian Prime Ministers have been British citizens, especially the earlier ones. No law against it.


----------



## McLovin (3 November 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Tony is a British citizen (dual). Plenty of Australian Prime Ministers have been British citizens, especially the earlier ones. No law against it.




You are ineligible if you're a citizen of any country but Australia. Tony is not a British citizen.



			
				Constitution said:
			
		

> 44. Any person who -
> (i.) Is under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power:
> 
> ...
> ...


----------



## Knobby22 (3 November 2016)

Thanks McLovin.
Julia Gillard was a dual citizen but you are right, she renounced it.
Abbott was a dual citizen in 1981, I suppose he renounced it also. When he matriculated from Oxford he did it as a British citizen.

https://independentaustralia.net/po...picious-case-of-tony-abbotts-citizenship,6859


----------



## Ves (3 November 2016)

McLovin said:


> You are ineligible if you're a citizen of any country but Australia. Tony is not a British citizen.



Maybe we should also take Turnbull to the High Court under s44 and get rid of him for being a puppet of America?


----------



## McLovin (3 November 2016)

Ves said:


> Maybe we should also take Turnbull to the High Court under s44 and get rid of him for being a puppet of America?




You'd have to toss out the whole Parliament.


----------



## Ves (3 November 2016)

McLovin said:


> You'd have to toss out the whole Parliament.



Lol, pretty much.   I'd say there is a very good reason why these sections are basically never used.


----------



## pixel (3 November 2016)

Ves said:


> Maybe we should also take Turnbull to the High Court under s44 and get rid of him for being a puppet of America?




We should have done that 16 years ago with Howard & Co.


----------



## Tisme (9 November 2016)

Between him and Abetz, they own the archetypal looks and personas so well used in movies as sly and arrogant, but they also seem to live up to that cliche:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-...ays-george-brandis-mislead-parliament/8006842


----------



## SirRumpole (9 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> Between him and Abetz, they own the archetypal looks and personas so well used in movies as sly and arrogant, but they also seem to live up to that cliche:
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-...ays-george-brandis-mislead-parliament/8006842




"Mean and tricky " was the description of John Howard by one of his own, and I think it still applies to the Liberal Party today.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=1810


----------



## noco (13 November 2016)

The Turnbull Government is going off the rails for what a true Liberal Party stands for and needs to get back on track as a conservative party or it will head for a certain train wreck.

It is interesting to note Cory Benardi, a true conservative, is attempting to stand up to Malcolm Turnbull in an effort to bring him back to reality......If Turnbull fails to heed Benardi,  his popularity and that of the party will continue to fall....Turnbull has 2.5 + years to move in a new direction or face defeat at the next election.  



http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...y/news-story/d9c82c9385522bb76e4c754f9e817e31


*IT’S time for the real conservatives within the Coalition to put up or shut up.

In the wake of the historic Brexit vote in the UK and Donald Trump’s extraordinary triumph in the US, there’s never been a better time for disaffected conservatives to take the Liberal Party back from the hopeless bedwetters who are spooked by gallery chatter and Twitter storms.

If they can’t bring the party back to something resembling John Howard’s Liberals, then perhaps it’s time for the birth of a new conservative force that unashamedly stands for freedom of speech, small government, lower taxes, border protection and energy security.

Australia has already felt a hint of the anti-establishment phenomenon sweeping the Western world. Millions of voters abandoned the major parties in the latest federal election, including more than one million conservative voters who cast their ballot for non-Coalition candidates. The birth of an organised, viable alternative — let’s call it the Conservative Party — would give those on the centre Right a real choice rather than wasting their votes on minor parties or independents as a protest against the Liberals.

The Conservative Party would also present an alternative for disaffected Labor supporters unhappy with the party’s lurch to the far Left.

Labor in 2016 is a vastly inferior version of the party led by Bob Hawke and Paul Keating.

It’s not only the Coalition that has lost support from once rusted- on supporters — the past two federal elections have seen Labor’s primary vote plummet to levels not seen since the 1930s.

An Essential Report poll released this month showed that the majority of Labor voters were against the party’s opposition to tough new border protection policies. Indeed, 52 per cent of Labor voters backed the Coalition’s lifetime ban for boat arrivals, and only 38 per cent opposed the move.*


----------



## Tink (14 November 2016)

As a conservative, noco, I agree.

From what I hear, the US election had the highest turn out for voting, since it is not compulsory there.

The silent majority have spoken.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 November 2016)

noco said:


> The Turnbull Government is going off the rails for what a true Liberal Party stands for and needs to get back on track as a conservative party or it will head for a certain train wreck.
> 
> It is interesting to note Cory Benardi, a true conservative, is attempting to stand up to Malcolm Turnbull in an effort to bring him back to reality......If Turnbull fails to heed Benardi,  his popularity and that of the party will continue to fall....Turnbull has 2.5 + years to move in a new direction or face defeat at the next election.




That's all b.s. noco. We saw what a Conservative government is like under Tony Abbott. Made promises they never intended to keep, and as soon as they get in they hit the people who can least afford it.

It will be a long time before people trust the Abbotts and Bernadis again. Turnbull just squeaked in, Abbott would have been slaughtered.


----------



## Tisme (14 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> That's all b.s. noco. We saw what a Conservative government is like under Tony Abbott. Made promises they never intended to keep, and as soon as they get in they hit the people who can least afford it.
> 
> It will be a long time before people trust the Abbotts and Bernadis again. Turnbull just squeaked in, Abbott would have been slaughtered.




It's the brand not the substance that is important to indoctrinated voters...... nothing will ever jemmy them from their commitment to the party. It's all lip service to give the lie the person is using the thinking part of his/her noodle.

The further away from the post WW2 "forgotten people" the more the LNP will become unidentifiable with Menzies synthesis of the frugal Scot, reward for toil, welfare for the those ill fated and the backbone middle class. Just rewarding the middle class with state sponsorship is so far removed from Menzie's "Leaners versus Lifters". His main thrust was to garner the middle ground vote at the expense of the Bunyip Aristrocracy political parties and leave the unskilled and poor working class to Labor and the benevolent Laws. The idea was to provide educational skills to the middle class & go getters and consolidate the stable family home as nursery of "noble instinct".

Both majors supported, by degrees, the social safety net , the difference was that the workers didn't think the reward for toil part was equitable in a supposed egalitarian classless society.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> It's the brand not the substance that is important to indoctrinated voters...... nothing will ever jemmy them from their commitment to the party. It's all lip service to give the lie the person is using the thinking part of his/her noodle.
> 
> The further away from the post WW2 "forgotten people" the more the LNP will become unidentifiable with Menzies synthesis of the frugal Scot, reward for toil, welfare for the those ill fated and the backbone middle class. Just rewarding the middle class with state sponsorship is so far removed from Menzie's "Leaners versus Lifters". His main thrust was to garner the middle ground vote at the expense of the Bunyip Aristrocracy political parties and leave the unskilled and poor working class to Labor and the benevolent Laws. The idea was to provide educational skills to the middle class & go getters and consolidate the stable family home as nursery of "noble instinct".
> 
> Both majors supported, by degrees, the social safety net , the difference was that the workers didn't think the reward for toil part was equitable in a supposed egalitarian classless society.




Exactly. Strange that Howard, Menzies' greatest fan, embarked on the middle class welfare road to the detriment of the structural budget.


----------



## Tisme (14 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Exactly. Strange that Howard, Menzies' greatest fan, embarked on the middle class welfare road to the detriment
> of the structural budget.




Agreed, the middle class are supposed to be self evolving, self sufficient and the progressive indefatigable force that will succeed if merely provided the environment for capitalism = plentiful supply of cheap unskilled labour, govt protectionism and judicial blind eyes. Menzies saw welfare to all as a lowering the bar to sentimental socialism.

Of course most LNP voters wouldn't have a clue of any of this and would rather abuse the Labor Party  and unions to distract critics. Menzies also supported organised labour, what capitalist wouldn't?


----------



## luutzu (14 November 2016)

Tink said:


> As a conservative, noco, I agree.
> 
> From what I hear, the US election had the highest turn out for voting, since it is not compulsory there.
> 
> The silent majority have spoken.




From what I heard, that's not true.

Turnout is the lowest of the last three cycles. By about 6 or 9m if I remember right. And it's been lower than the last, which was lower, still, than the last.

The silent majority, while White, are not so much the nationalist right wing type as we're told. They're in places where Obama won previously. 

But you do know that there's not much real difference between Clinton and Trump right? They're what people call "old wine, new bottle".


----------



## luutzu (14 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> Agreed, the middle class are supposed to be self evolving, self sufficient and the progressive indefatigable force that will succeed if merely provided the environment for capitalism = plentiful supply of cheap unskilled labour, govt protectionism and judicial blind eyes. Menzies saw welfare to all as a lowering the bar to sentimental socialism.
> 
> Of course most LNP voters wouldn't have a clue of any of this and would rather abuse the Labor Party  and unions to distract critics. Menzies also supported organised labour, what capitalist wouldn't?




Did you really agree with SirR?

True, what capitalist wouldn't support organised labour. That's why US organised labour backed Clinton but its rank and file gave her the finger.


----------



## Tisme (14 November 2016)

luutzu said:


> Did you really agree with SirR?
> 
> True, what capitalist wouldn't support organised labour. That's why US organised labour backed Clinton but its rank and file gave her the finger.




Hard not agree with facts ... unless you are predisposed to argue contrary because of envy and hate; something neither Rumpole nor myself practice.


----------



## noco (14 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> That's all b.s. noco. We saw what a Conservative government is like under Tony Abbott. Made promises they never intended to keep, and as soon as they get in they hit the people who can least afford it.
> 
> It will be a long time before people trust the Abbotts and Bernadis again. Turnbull just squeaked in, Abbott would have been slaughtered.




And may I remind you what we saw under Rudd/Gillard/Rudd was 10 times worse so don't talk to me about BS.

"THERE WILL NEVER BE A CARBON TAX UNDER A GOVERNMENT I LEAD".....Remember Julia Gillard?...And there is more if you want it buddy.


----------



## noco (16 November 2016)

The future of Malcom Turnbull does appear grim after reading this link from Terry McCran.

IMHO I can not see Turnbull lasting another 12 months.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/busin...y/news-story/385b4a50ec6f2b38f6111b22a20f08bb


*MALCOLM Turnbull — and even more the “dead men (non-gender specific) walking” sitting on the backbenches behind him — has one last chance.

To seize it he must personally, and I do mean personally, ring Andrew Bolt of this paper today to ask for a full hour of his Sky News program later this week, to both go one on one, head — no holds barred — to-head, and to lay out a comprehensive, cohesive, freedom-focused policy and political agenda.

For the last year since he knocked off Tony Abbott, Turnbull has been “hiding under his desk” so far as Bolt is concerned. He’s both outright refused and even more mindlessly failed to seek to go on his program.

In the privacy of his sophisticated complete lack of both self and general awareness, no doubt he’s rationalised his cowardice on the basis that it would be below both his intellect and his social conscience to “validate” Bolt.

Yes, in the election campaign he did finally countenance stooping to engage both with a similar “lesser” in Sydney radio’s Alan Jones, and through him, all those “down under deplorables” in strange, foreign places like the western suburbs.*


----------



## SirRumpole (16 November 2016)

noco said:


> The future of Malcom Turnbull does appear grim after reading this link from Terry McCran.
> 
> IMHO I can not see Turnbull lasting another 12 months.
> 
> ...




Well, that's good news for the Labor Party. Remember how stunned Shorten was when Abbott departed ? Shorten had Abbott on toast. Turnbull saved the Party from utter destruction.

If a far Right Winger like Abbott comes back then it will be curtains for the Libs.


----------



## Tisme (16 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Well, that's good news for the Labor Party. Remember how stunned Shorten was when Abbott departed ? Shorten had Abbott on toast. Turnbull saved the Party from utter destruction.
> 
> If a far Right Winger like Abbott comes back then it will be curtains for the Libs.




Yeah one unbendable cast iron hokey party leader replaced by wibble wobble jelly on a plate. It's frightening looking at the gene pool they could draw from to replace the current King Lear.

Shorten is the only thing standing in the way of the girls brigade who are more interested in gays and other fringe subjects rather than national important stuff. Wong and Plibersek FFS!


----------



## SirRumpole (16 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> Wong and Plibersek FFS!




No argument that those two have their own barrows to push at the expense of the national interest. I'd certainly like to hear less from them and more from Bowen, Butler, Albanese and [shudder] even Bill when he is talking about important stuff.


----------



## noco (16 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Well, that's good news for the Labor Party. Remember how stunned Shorten was when Abbott departed ? Shorten had Abbott on toast. Turnbull saved the Party from utter destruction.
> 
> If a far Right Winger like Abbott comes back then it will be curtains for the Libs.




I am sure Abbott would like to come back but I really don't think he has a chance in hell.

I can foresee a split coming in the Liberal Party if Turnbull does not change and move away from the left......If that happens we might see a new conservative party rise and Pauline Hanson may be the winner.


----------



## explod (16 November 2016)

noco said:


> I am sure Abbott would like to come back but I really don't think he has a chance in hell.
> 
> I can foresee a split coming in the Liberal Party if Turnbull does not change and move away from the left......If that happens we might see a new conservative party rise and Pauline Hanson may be the winner.




Dont' worry noco Turnbull's going right.  I reckon even your left is right, check your feet again.

From the Guardian today, one of the few balanced tabloids left.



> Enter the new crusade against the ABC. Having given it a good pummeling is not enough. Now the call is to put it to the stake. This is the modern version of book burning. The anti-political correctness brigade is about ruthlessly putting down their own political correctness and dealing with dissent much more harshly than even they suggested their opponents of doing.
> 
> And who other is this elitist Media?  It’s unlikely to refers to News Corporation, which happens to be by far the biggest media monopoly in the country. Would it be Fairfax? News Limited does own about half of it. This is not likely to be the real target. It leaves independent journalists, Internet media and other small outlets that do not operate through the News Limited control of information.
> 
> ...


----------



## qldfrog (16 November 2016)

explod said:


> From the Guardian today, one of the few balanced tabloids left.



Explod, to be fair, only the Far left could see the Guardian as balanced....


----------



## SirRumpole (16 November 2016)

qldfrog said:


> Explod, to be fair, only the Far left could see the Guardian as balanced....




Maybe, but blaming the media is a good sign that Turnbull has lost the plot.


----------



## qldfrog (17 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Maybe, but blaming the media is a good sign that Turnbull has lost the plot.



True, there is nothing new about ABC being a far left out of reality "news" body:
just look at the headlines today:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/
today, in front page, second feature  we have:"I felt degraded, humiliated”: meet the woman who took Bill Leak’s cartoon to the Human Rights Commission"
as a freedom lover and not an Allan Jones type at all, I found this revolting and sickening, as was their coverage of the uni students here.
They are carrying on, and on with the very reasons the left created Trumps and Brexit;
I really believe the left has lost the plot..
but not a reason to blame the ABC for our PM; in the real world, nobody gives the s*it about the ABC anymore;
people do not watch TV as much and the average Oz do not tune SBS or ABC on their sets


----------



## SirRumpole (17 November 2016)

qldfrog said:


> today, in front page, second feature  we have:"I felt degraded, humiliated”: meet the woman who took Bill Leak’s cartoon to the Human Rights Commission"
> as a freedom lover and not an Allan Jones type at all, I found this revolting and sickening, as was their coverage of




I felt revolted by that woman's attitude too, but if the ABC hadn't reported that story then we would not have known of her stupidity and why 18C should be modified.

Just because the ABC reported that woman's opinions doesn't mean they agree with her. It's their job to reports all sides of a story so we can make an informed decision rather than just follow the government line like the commercials do.


----------



## Tisme (17 November 2016)

qldfrog said:


> True, there is nothing new about ABC being a far left out of reality "news" body:
> just look at the headlines today:
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/
> today, in front page, second feature  we have:"I felt degraded, humiliated”: meet the woman who took Bill Leak’s cartoon to the Human Rights Commission"
> ...




The ABC was once a boring station, a paragon of high brow neutrality, a conjunctive with British stiff probity and the high bar of cultivated spoken English language. These days the accents have been replaced with bushy nasal twang,  and news with the chattering classes.  

You only have to look at the advert for the coming HD TV on ABC TV to see the contrast with the past: scruffy fella, the once comic ocker accent and a inability to pronounce the letter "aitch". There's Rave music video show complete with course language and uncultured low life actors. etc. etc.

There are really good productions form the ABC, but some of the content is fairly woeful and crude. IMO


----------



## SirRumpole (17 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> The ABC was once a boring station, a paragon of high brow neutrality, a conjunctive with British stiff probity and the high bar of cultivated spoken English language. These days the accents have been replaced with bushy nasal twang,  and news with the chattering classes.
> 
> You only have to look at the advert for the coming HD TV on ABC TV to see the contrast with the past: scruffy fella, the once comic ocker accent and a inability to pronounce the letter "aitch". There's Rave music video show complete with course language and uncultured low life actors. etc. etc.
> 
> There are really good productions form the ABC, but some of the content is fairly woeful and crude. IMO




Yes, the ABC has progressively been dumbed down over the years to the point where there is little worth watching on ABC TV now just like the commercials, ratings seem to have taken over from in depth reporting. I really think that fund cuts from the Right have the clear intention of devaluing and ultimately flogging off the ABC, and that will be to the detriment of those wanting a non Right Wing sychophantic and independent broadcaster.


----------



## qldfrog (17 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I felt revolted by that woman's attitude too, but if the ABC hadn't reported that story then we would not have known of her stupidity and why 18C should be modified.
> 
> Just because the ABC reported that woman's opinions doesn't mean they agree with her. It's their job to reports all sides of a story so we can make an informed decision rather than just follow the government line like the commercials do.



this should not be in the front page, second feature now anymore; and this is just an example: open their front page take a step back and tell me this is not a new version of the Pravda, so biaised it is not funny;
What should be in the front page today should be the euthanasia vote results in SA, the fact that wages have been quasi stagnant, etc but they must have listened to me as the cartoon story is now downgraded to feature 4 or 5  as I looked.
I do not really believe the commercials follow the line of the government: you may feel that as a ALP supporter, but if you look here in qld at the headlines of Brisbane Times or Courier mail and their choice of pictures forour current/previous PM:it tells clearly that they are not supportive either of the LNP.IMHO, they have their own target (self interested of course) + common crass populism for sales purpose.Anyway, quite off topic.My apologies


----------



## Tisme (17 November 2016)

qldfrog said:


> this should not be in the front page, second feature now anymore; and this is just an example: open their front page take a step back and tell me this is not a new version of the Pravda, so biaised it is not funny;
> What should be in the front page today should be the euthanasia vote results in SA, the fact that wages have been quasi stagnant, etc but they must have listened to me as the cartoon story is now downgraded to feature 4 or 5  as I looked.
> I do not really believe the commercials follow the line of the government: you may feel that as a ALP supporter, but if you look here in qld at the headlines of Brisbane Times or Courier mail and their choice of pictures forour current/previous PM:it tells clearly that they are not supportive either of the LNP.IMHO, they have their own target (self interested of course) + common crass populism for sales purpose.Anyway, quite off topic.My apologies




Don't ever be in any doubt that Christopher Dore is in no way complimentary of the Labor Party and Labour movement. Any attack on the LNP would be on individuals within, but not on the whole of party. His obsequious devotion to the LNP is stone set in concrete and the Courier Mail is his lectern from where he preaches his  zealous anti socialistic sermons. 

Chris, like Howard has a deep seated issue with the working class that must originate from an unsavoury incident as a child IMO.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 November 2016)

qldfrog said:


> example: open their front page take a step back and tell me this is not a new version of the Pravda, so biaised it is not funny;




Well, the ABC has a story about Obama on it's front page and he's no friend of the Russians I believe.


----------



## Tisme (18 November 2016)

Sent to me by a subscriber:



> Newsflash: "A flood of doctors" are abandoning bulk billing.1
> 
> According to a report in the Herald Sun, more GP practices are ending bulk billing as the Turnbull Government refuses to lift the freeze on the GP Medicare rebate.1 And Medicare statistics out this week show bulk billing rates dropping in the last period.2
> 
> ...


----------



## Tisme (19 November 2016)

Malcolm Fraser's fault:



> “The reality is that Malcolm Fraser did make mistakes in bringing some people in in the 1970s and we’re seeing that today. We need to be honest in having that discussion.”




The people who voted for him should be held accountable for ther actions. 


https://www.theguardian.com/austral...ys-peter-dutton?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Facebook


----------



## SirRumpole (19 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> Malcolm Fraser's fault:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




There is probably some truth in what Dutton is saying, but there is also something creepy about the man. The blame anyone else strategy continues.

Is this government banning Muslim immigrants ? If not they will be held accountable by future Labor governments.


----------



## bellenuit (19 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Is this government banning Muslim immigrants ? If not they will be held accountable by future Labor governments.




I remember you have said in the past that our government cannot openly ban Muslim immigrants for obvious reasons but the government should have an unstated policy to severely limit them coming here (or something to that effect, but correct me if I am wrong). I somehow think that is the rational behind the deal with the US, where though not regarded or stated as a swap, we appear to be accepting Central American refugees in exchange for those on Manus and Nauru. Although Plibersek has asked, what is the difference between this and what the Labor Government tried to do with Malaysia, I think that is a fundamental difference. Malaysia would have dumped on us those Muslims whom they deemed to difficult to settle in Malaysia, and I am sure that would have included a fair number who held extreme views.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 November 2016)

bellenuit said:


> I remember you have said in the past that our government cannot openly ban Muslim immigrants for obvious reasons but the government should have an unstated policy to severely limit them coming here (or something to that effect, but correct me if I am wrong). I somehow think that is the rational behind the deal with the US, where though not regarded or stated as a swap, we appear to be accepting Central American refugees in exchange for those on Manus and Nauru. Although Plibersek has asked, what is the difference between this and what the Labor Government tried to do with Malaysia, I think that is a fundamental difference. Malaysia would have dumped on us those Muslims whom they deemed to difficult to settle in Malaysia, and I am sure that would have included a fair number who held extreme views.




You are not wrong in what I said. We don't have to ask for trouble in the future but there is no point openly antagonising existing ethnic groups.

I actually think that there is a good economic case in reducing immigration per se, which is that technology is taking jobs all through the economy resulting in an over supply of labor, and there is no point making this worse by adding to the supply. Wages will only continue to stagnate and decline if we continue with high immigration intakes.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 November 2016)

Budget deficits will grow, economist warns; Morrison admits balanced budget by 2021 uncertain


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-21/budget-deficits-to-keep-increasing-warns-economist/8041512


----------



## noco (21 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Budget deficits will grow, economist warns; Morrison admits balanced budget by 2021 uncertain
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-21/budget-deficits-to-keep-increasing-warns-economist/8041512




It is time for the Green/Labor left wing socialist coalition to show some bi-partisan support to help fix the mess they created.
Stop blocking the remedies in the Senate......Grow some balls and show some National interest.......All the Grreen/Labor Party are interested in is making the Government look inefficient and Jelly Mally appears to working with them...Turnbull has to go......We need a Donald Trump who is not frightened to stand up to this socialist cancer we have in Australia.


----------



## Tisme (21 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Budget deficits will grow, economist warns; Morrison admits balanced budget by 2021 uncertain
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-21/budget-deficits-to-keep-increasing-warns-economist/8041512




Yeah I couldn't stop watching his politically cultivated embouchured lips that seem made for weasel words and lies.


----------



## noco (21 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> Yeah I couldn't stop watching his politically cultivated embouchured lips that seem made for weasel words and lies.




And economists also admit, things would have been worse under Labor.


----------



## dutchie (21 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Budget deficits will grow, economist warns; Morrison admits balanced budget by 2021 uncertain
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-21/budget-deficits-to-keep-increasing-warns-economist/8041512




Coalition as good as Labor at bullsh*ting/lying.

"We will get budget into surplus by spending more and earning less"


----------



## SirRumpole (21 November 2016)

Why corporate tax cuts won't work as well as some people say.





> As we saw last week, wages growth is the lowest on record, and for most of this year almost all the jobs growth has been part time or casual.
> 
> That's not because corporate taxes are too high. *It is because there is spare capacity in the labour market. And that's a trend likely to continue.*
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-...ob-dylan-cant-be-bothered-nobel-prize/8041130


----------



## Tisme (21 November 2016)

noco said:


> And economists also admit, things would have been worse under Labor.




So what Noco? 

We have stumbled through debt and/or deficit all our National lives. We went in deep for bridges, dams, harbours, pipelines, power stations, railways, highways, engineering workshops, etc  and every now and again we pop our heads up and enjoy the fruits and then we get back onto the shovel and work again.

The Menzies era of regulated banks, regulated markets, regulate money, blah blah is gone. The new politician has to know the economic volatlity as well as the political game these days, plus deal with the pack of journalistic vultures who look for the nasty rather than the national comradery.

It's a purile argument always blaming people and predicting the sky falling in. Leave that to the friendless, humourless nasty girl and/or Nigel Nobody at primary school who never got to fit in with the playground crowd and never will.


----------



## noco (21 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> So what Noco?
> 
> We have stumbled through debt and/or deficit all our National lives. We went in deep for bridges, dams, harbours, pipelines, power stations, railways, highways, engineering workshops, etc  and every now and again we pop our heads up and enjoy the fruits and then we get back onto the shovel and work again.
> 
> ...




So who else is to blame for the mess we are currently in apart from the Green/Labor socialist left wing coalition?
$1 billion in interest each month and counting.....Pink bats..overpriced school halls....$900 Dudd cheques...cash for clunkers.....fuel watch....CARBON TAX ( There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead)......50,000 illegals on welfare......a signed agreement between Gillard and Brown.......Labor controlled by the  CFMEU creating havoc in the building industry.....The Green/Labor blowing up coal fired power stations .....shortage of power for industry in SA......Too many  public servants both state and Federal.....we need to work leaner and meaner.... 

And it has all not been necessary.....But that is all a part of the Socialist strategy.....ruin the economy of a country and revert to socialistic central control.


----------



## noco (21 November 2016)

There are savings of $19billion which the Green/Labor left  wing socialist coalition will not pass in the National interest of course.

https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/morrison-wont-confirm-surplus-timing-033808321.html

*Treasurer Scott Morrison has declined to confirm whether the government is sticking to its prediction for a budget surplus in 2020/21.

Instead he stated the obvious - Australia's finances will be back in the black when expenditure is less than revenue.

"You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out," Mr Morrison said in response to a Labor question during parliamentary question time on Monday.

Deloitte Access Economics predicts a boost to national income from a sharp rise in coal prices will only partly offset a deterioration in tax revenues on the back of record low wage growth and job creation undershooting official forecasts.

It's economist and ardent budget watcher Chris Richardson expects the budget deficit to be $40.5 billion in 2016/17 rather than the $37.1 billion forecast in the May budget.

Shadow treasurer Chris Bowen asked the treasurer whether the budget would be back in balance in 2021 if its $50 billion worth of business tax cuts were dropped

"I don't intend to engage in the hypotheticals of the member opposite," Mr Morrison replied.

"I ask him what does he think the impact on the budget is going to be if they continue in their approach of blocking $19 billion in budget savings measures?"*


----------



## SirRumpole (22 November 2016)

If the government is looking for more revenue, here is one way to get it.

LNG boom: Australian Government 'far behind' in capturing benefits, paper finds

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-22/australia-government-revenue-oil-and-gas-production/8043326


----------



## Tisme (22 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> If the government is looking for more revenue, here is one way to get it.
> 
> LNG boom: Australian Government 'far behind' in capturing benefits, paper finds
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-22/australia-government-revenue-oil-and-gas-production/8043326





I see the miners are reducing their workforce. This will have a knock on effect with support workers.

Be interesting to see how the govt changes the GDP calc to negate the zip real growth of the economy since they took office. 

Let's hope there's some new industry and income generators by the time the Gillard/Rudd spend stops washing through the economy.... highly unlikely given the LNP seems averse to real infra structure and nation building, preferring to go after unions, Lebanese migrants, Malcolm Fraser (e.g. Vietnamese migrants), the ABC, Human Rights Commission, etc.

One bright spot is that the government seem to have started realising they were the party elected two polls ago. It's not stopping them blaming Labor for their own failures, but one day the penny will drop.


----------



## noco (22 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> I see the miners are reducing their workforce. This will have a knock on effect with support workers.
> 
> Be interesting to see how the govt changes the GDP calc to negate the zip real growth of the economy since they took office.
> 
> ...




When the penny drops, it will be too late for the two useless major parties.......There is room for a new party who has the guts to stand up to all the stupid political correctness and stand over tactics by organizations who want ruin our Nation. .

Who knows what will happen......Maybe the Trump Party in Australia....Maybe One Nation will rise to the occasion....or maybe someone like Cory Benardi to form a true conservative party.

Now stick all that in your pipe and smoke it.

Now wait for it......I can hear that fast train coming out of the tunnel to run me over....

:shoot:


----------



## Tisme (22 November 2016)

noco said:


> When the penny drops, it will be too late for the two useless major parties.......There is room for a new party who has the guts to stand up to all the stupid political correctness and stand over tactics by organizations who want ruin our Nation. .




agreed


----------



## SirRumpole (22 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> agreed




Agreed too, but a far Right party isn't the answer. There needs to be a centre party that is not the creature of unions or business but acts for the consumer and nation first and vested interests second. That means using Right wing policies where appropriate , eg destroying the silly political correctness culture we now have, and Left wing policies when appropriate eg getting back control of our natural resources like coal , iron ore and gas and getting a fair return for them.

The closest I have seen to this ideal is Xenephon, and I will vote for him whenever I can in future.


----------



## luutzu (22 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Agreed too, but a far Right party isn't the answer. There needs to be a centre party that is not the creature of unions or business but acts for the consumer and nation first and vested interests second. That means using Right wing policies where appropriate , eg destroying the silly political correctness culture we now have, and Left wing policies when appropriate eg getting back control of our natural resources like coal , iron ore and gas and getting a fair return for them.
> 
> The closest I have seen to this ideal is Xenephon, and I will vote for him whenever I can in future.




Maybe that party is already here, if only it recognise it is a force to be reckon with, stop fighting among itself, kick its weaker members around for scraps and start to demand the taxes they've been paying going back among them: The people.

There is no such thing as an enlightened leader or a party of the people. Since it still is, technically, a democracy where the masses control that handle of state... stop delegating and hopey for changey.


----------



## noco (22 November 2016)

luutzu said:


> Maybe that party is already here, if only it recognise it is a force to be reckon with, stop fighting among itself, kick its weaker members around for scraps and start to demand the taxes they've been paying going back among them: The people.
> 
> There is no such thing as an enlightened leader or a party of the people. Since it still is, technically, a democracy where the masses control that handle of state... stop delegating and hopey for changey.




All Turnbull has to do is start listening to the people and what they are saying.

Follow Donald Trump.....tear up the Paris agreement.....ban any more Muslim immigration .....and look after middle class........Recognize the UN Global Warming is a scam....This is what voters want to hear. 

Ahla Pauline Hanson.

Turnbull's and the Liberal Party's stakes will go up over night.......But he does not have the guts to do it.


----------



## luutzu (22 November 2016)

noco said:


> All Turnbull has to do is start listening to the people and what they are saying.
> 
> Follow Donald Trump.....tear up the Paris agreement.....ban any more Muslim immigration .....and look after middle class........Recognize the UN Global Warming is a scam....This is what voters want to hear.
> 
> ...




Maybe in your days, politicians would by and large care for the country and its plebs. Though I'd put that to corporations being in its infancy and the pollies got the Commies to worry about... that and the Japs just retreated from the gates kind scare the elites a little bit.

But nowadays, plebs are just there to pay taxes and get out of the way. 

No welfare for the poor, plenty of welfare and job programme for the rich and their corporations.

Taking care of widows and orphans mean not taxing bonds and financial gains since, as we all know, widows and orphans of the uber rich deserve a lot of tender care and love while the bogans and coloured folks on the fringes... mehhh.


Trump ain't going to do a dam thing for the people, the masses. He never has and now in his sixties, he's not going to see any reason why he should change and start caring. 

Just look at who he's tapping to be in his cabinet. It's a corporation and climate "realist" wet dream. 

Maybe Hanson is different and will ... na, she's smart. And smart people know what to say to get votes and money and power. It kind of stop there with our Pauline. 

I mean, Muslim vileness being the flavour of the decade... so there she goes, not one word against the Chinese and Asian she was wrong to target in the 90s. See what money can do to people of real character?

So now it's Muslims, terrorist and the bogans and welfare cheats who's having it too good.


----------



## noco (22 November 2016)

luutzu said:


> Maybe in your days, politicians would by and large care for the country and its plebs. Though I'd put that to corporations being in its infancy and the pollies got the Commies to worry about... that and the Japs just retreated from the gates kind scare the elites a little bit.
> 
> But nowadays, plebs are just there to pay taxes and get out of the way.
> 
> ...




But you have to agree Luu, the two leaders we have now in Turnbull and Shorten are not doing their jobs in the interest of the nation.

We need a much stronger leader to move us away from political correctness and to be able to live our lives without fear or favor from political persuasion and biased propaganda.


----------



## luutzu (23 November 2016)

noco said:


> But you have to agree Luu, the two leaders we have now in Turnbull and Shorten are not doing their jobs in the interest of the nation.
> 
> We need a much stronger leader to move us away from political correctness and to be able to live our lives without fear or favor from political persuasion and biased propaganda.




I guess it depends on what we mean by "interest of the nation".

They might actually believe that what's good for Holden is good for Australia. Oh wait 

As some much smarter guy was saying recently of American politics, big business got two parties fighting for them. The people got zero party.

So is the national interest the interest of the majority of the people; or is it the interest of big business and "job creators"?

Read a headline the other day where Turnbull's gov't is planning to ban claiming of "non compulsory" work clothes as a tax deductible item. So those fluoro shirt and vest, nurses non-uniform work uniform... forget about claiming that. 

It'll save up to $50M big one. That $50M will put a big dent into the recent tax cuts for mom and pop businesses like CBA and WBC and BHP. Can't give it all away I guess.


I think the kind of "political correctness" and propaganda you have in mind are more race and religion related. If race and migrants and welfare cheats are the problem, I might be with you. But they're not.

Political correctness that we're hiding from are talks about the rich having it too good; or corporations screwing the country over and take all the welfare they're entitled to without any politician ever calling it that.

To have the elite and corporate power controlling the national interest and its narratives, then to add some sort of "strong man" leadership at the top... it might walk us away from pussying around but it'll take us further to where I'm sure you do not mean for us to go either.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 November 2016)

luutzu said:
			
		

> I think the kind of "political correctness" and propaganda you have in mind are more race and religion related. If race and migrants and welfare cheats are the problem, I might be with you. But they're not.




The political correctness I object to was seen with the furore over the Bill Leak cartoon. Police on the ground confirmed that the type of attitude they have to deal with was accurately represented by Leak's cartoon, and yet the shrill PC brigade turned the argument into a debate about whether Leak should have actually told reality rather that what should be done about the underlying problem.

There should be no licence for making things up or spreading false propaganda, comments should be factually based, but when they are the focus should be on the real issue, not harassing people who bring these issues to light.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 November 2016)

Is common sense finally starting to sink in for the Conservatives ?


NSW Planning Minister argues against negative gearing, wants focus on housing affordability crisis





> New South Wales Planning Minister Rob Stokes has broken ranks with his federal Liberal Party colleagues on the issue of negative gearing, arguing the rules should change to help ease Sydney's housing affordability crisis.
> 
> Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull ruled out changes to negative gearing during the election, and last month Treasurer Scott Morrison pressured the states by arguing they needed to release more land to boost supply.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tisme (25 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Is common sense finally starting to sink in for the Conservatives ?




They are trying the Trump suits on for size.

The realisation has finally hit the Einsteins up here in the LNP and they looking to demutualise the LNP back to the Nationals and the Libs so they can make political gain on the back of the Pauline rise in poll popularity. They also want the Federal Attorney General's head


----------



## SirRumpole (25 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> They are trying the Trump suits on for size.
> 
> The realisation has finally hit the Einsteins up here in the LNP and they looking to demutualise the LNP back to the Nationals and the Libs so they can make political gain on the back of the Pauline rise in poll popularity. They also want the Federal Attorney General's head




You mean the Nats want to split from the Libs then go as Right as they can to get back the disaffected vote ?

Is this the start of the extreme Right Bernadi Tea Party ? Might get a few Liberal defections as well as the Nats.


----------



## Tisme (25 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You mean the Nats want to split from the Libs then go as Right as they can to get back the disaffected vote ?
> 
> Is this the start of the extreme Right Bernadi Tea Party ? Might get a few Liberal defections as well as the Nats.




Yep and probably yep


----------



## SirRumpole (25 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> Yep and probably yep




I don't think we are Trump comparable. The Right ie Pauline made some gains, but so did the Left ie Labor at the last election. Pauline is good for a protest , but this term will see if she can deliver. Palmer certainly didn't.

 With due respect to the people here who voted for Pauline, I think she's just in it for the money. Running a fish and chip shop is too much like hard work.


----------



## noco (25 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I don't think we are Trump comparable. The Right ie Pauline made some gains, but so did the Left ie Labor at the last election. Pauline is good for a protest , but this term will see if she can deliver. Palmer certainly didn't.
> 
> With due respect to the people here who voted for Pauline, I think she's just in it for the money. Running a fish and chip shop is too much like hard work.




I really don't think Labor has anything to crow about at the last election  as it was their second lowest primary vote since 1949....The Liberals did not do too well either.....23% went to other parties and independents.

Yes running a fish and chip shop like any business is hard work......Hard work is something many on this forum would not know.......If you have never been in business, you would never have enjoyed the experience....At least Pauline knows what hard work is all about.

I disagree with you on the point Pauline is in it for the money .....She has genuine concerns for people and the National interest....She is listening to people...Something both Labor and the Liberals have forgotten.

Most of the ex union hacks who are in parliament also would not know what a hard days work is.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-03/election-results-historical-comparison/7560888


----------



## luutzu (25 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The political correctness I object to was seen with the furore over the Bill Leak cartoon. Police on the ground confirmed that the type of attitude they have to deal with was accurately represented by Leak's cartoon, and yet the shrill PC brigade turned the argument into a debate about whether Leak should have actually told reality rather that what should be done about the underlying problem.
> 
> There should be no licence for making things up or spreading false propaganda, comments should be factually based, but when they are the focus should be on the real issue, not harassing people who bring these issues to light.




Just looked up Bill Leak's cartoons and the few that I saw... nah, he's not telling the hard truth or whatever. It's basically popular stereotyping. 

But yea, by all mean say things as they are, no matter how politically incorrect.


Went to the City today and man, there are way too many homeless Australians out there. They are almost at every corner. 

What the heck is happening to Australia? Give people some help. Seriously, I've seen less beggars in VN when I was there a couple of years ago. 

Housing is seriously out of reach for an average Australian family; jobs are being offshored; education and technical training are cut and privatised; people are homeless and shiet out of luck.

Next Sydney's council might come up with some bright ideas like some council in the UK and put bird spikes where the homeless would sleeps.


----------



## luutzu (25 November 2016)

noco said:


> I really don't think Labor has anything to crow about at the last election  as it was their second lowest primary vote since 1949....The Liberals did not do too well either.....23% went to other parties and independents.
> 
> Yes running a fish and chip shop like any business is hard work......Hard work is something many on this forum would not know.......If you have never been in business, you would never have enjoyed the experience....At least Pauline knows what hard work is all about.
> 
> ...




What has Hanson proposed that would benefit the Aussie battler? Can you name a few of her bright ideas?

It's pretty easy for most to say they feel the pain and been there and know what it's like. That's often not enough since practically all politicians say the same stuff.


----------



## noco (25 November 2016)

luutzu said:


> What has Hanson proposed that would benefit the Aussie battler? Can you name a few of her bright ideas?
> 
> It's pretty easy for most to say they feel the pain and been there and know what it's like. That's often not enough since practically all politicians say the same stuff.





Luu, you should not be so lazy in finding out what One Nation stands for.........But I don't mind helping lazy people.

http://www.onenation.com.au/policies/islam


----------



## luutzu (25 November 2016)

noco said:


> Luu, you should not be so lazy in finding out what One Nation stands for.........But I don't mind helping lazy people.
> 
> http://www.onenation.com.au/policies/islam




It's not looking good there noco. And these are the official, marketing policies. The reality would be a lot uglier.
*
Islam: *
Islam is bad because it's a theocracy. Well no kidding. A religion is a theocracy of sort right?

Remember when Christianity was the way to civilise barbarians and savages? How good was Christian values, as applied for such purposes, to those unlucky enough to not be born a White Christian?

There are good morality in Christianity, as there are good in every other religion, Islam included. There are also the nasty bits... so it depends on what purpose it is use for by the state. 

To slam Islam and Muslims as backwards and warmongering terrorists because of Islam... that's just plain false, and a bit hypocritical. Also not very beneficial to the Muslim and Arab Australians.


*University Allowance*

They make it sound reasonable, until you think about it.

So uni students living at home shouldn't have their part-time work, and shouldn't have their parents' combined income be considered in applying for Student allowance? Even if the parents both earn a combined $150K?

First, note the "university" in the Allowance policy. Does this include students at TAFE or other tertiary institution? Just uni students - the "best and brightest", and best and brightest with fairly well off parents.

Sounds like favouring kids with rich parents to me. 

But say rich kids need welfare too... How does it follow from their argument that those over 18 should not be considered dependent, should have their apron string cut from their well to do folks, should be make independent and so can grow and enrich the country... then somehow imply that if we let them get the same allowance as unemployment, it mean they wouldn't have to get a part time job.

Not working is a good training ground for independence?

How does uni students not working - through gov't welfare being generous towards them that they don't need to work - help free up jobs for single parents and other kids. Kids at TAFE not getting the allowance would be helped because they'd be forced to work?


*Age Pension*
Should be treated with respect, dignity, they have work so hard, struggled so much etc.... then why does One Nation "...not support increasing the age of entitlement to 70 years of age"??

What's the average life expectancy now? 80? 85?  So the last couple of decades of our seniors who's struggling financially should be their problem?

*Multiculturalism*

What a bunch of nonsense.

First, you cannot guarantee any one would ever be loyal to their country. People look after their own interests, and if that mean a few million under the table for state secrets, they'd do it regardless of their race, religion or "Australianess".

Second, all the positives that such a policy intends to achieve - don't do terrorism, value our freedom, defend the country - these are done at the swearing in or prescribed by law and enforced by gov't security agencies.

How does getting rid of anti-discrimination laws protect Australian or unify its people? We just all colour ourselves White? Get them cream to bleach the brown and black out, dye our hair red? 

Are we sure that Christianity is what make Australia great? What make Australia Australia?

A country become unified and awesome because it promotes the good and discourage/punish the bad. Since no culture or religion can claim to be totally awesome in every way... let's leave it at that and adapt and promote what is noble.

And you can't do that by first telling the refugees to go get screwed. You cannot do it by telling people they better forget and abandon all their heritage.

If people can quickly abandon their heritage, can just renounce their religion and faith, all just to get along and be rewarded... well how in the hell do you seriously expect them to be loyal to you, to Australia? I mean, if they can abandon and spit on their ancestor's tradition just because the new master says so... a newer master with better opportunity saying so will make them what? Loyal to the old master?


And how do you expect people to be genuinely fighting for the national interest, to care for the plight of the poor and unfortunate when you promote the idea of screwing people are seeking refuge?



Fair enough with CSG mining. It's a potential disaster for Australia. But don't worry too much, them miners and oilers will have a few discussions and meetings to update Pauline on how safe and awesome CSG is.


----------



## noco (25 November 2016)

luutzu said:


> It's not looking good there noco. And these are the official, marketing policies. The reality would be a lot uglier.
> *
> Islam: *
> Islam is bad because it's a theocracy. Well no kidding. A religion is a theocracy of sort right?
> ...




I guess it all depends how you want to look at things.......You can exaggerate a bit if you want to.

It is just that you said you not know what her policies are or what she stood for and I presented them to you.

If you don't like what she stands for then don't vote for her...Maybe you prefer socialism (Communism)...I don't really know which side of the fence you stand and I don't really give a rat's a$se.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 November 2016)

> If you don't like what she stands for then don't vote for her...Maybe you prefer socialism (Communism)...I don't really know which side of the fence you stand and I don't really give a rat's a$se.




There speaks the voice of Facism. I can see the wardrobe full of SS uniforms.


----------



## Tisme (26 November 2016)

luutzu said:


> It's not looking good there noco. And these are the official, marketing policies. The reality would be a lot uglier.
> *
> Islam: *
> Islam is bad because it's a theocracy. Well no kidding. A religion is a theocracy of sort right?
> ...




Are you confusing assimilation and imperialism?


----------



## SirRumpole (26 November 2016)

Barnaby's pork barrelling to cost taxpayers $25 million for no good reason.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-...dicines-authority-allowed-to-relocate/7996372


----------



## drsmith (26 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Barnaby's pork barrelling to cost taxpayers $25 million for no good reason.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-...dicines-authority-allowed-to-relocate/7996372



This is the sort of outcome that puts voters off major parties and is particularly poor form from Barnaby Joyce and a conservative based government.

From what I've read quickly in the media this morning, the move seems to have no material redeeming features whatsoever. 

http://www.afr.com/news/barnaby-joy...to-begin-move-out-of-canberra-20161124-gswmhz


----------



## noco (26 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> There speaks the voice of Facism. I can see the wardrobe full of SS uniforms.




And a typical reply from  true Fabian who only knows one response....

Rumpy, you can vilify me ......you can abuse me...you can character assassinate me all you like, but you will never ever silence me on this Forum as long as I live.....You have no hope in hell of pushing me off and that is what you and you and your  socialists buddies try to do to members who disagree with you.

You best change your attitude and remember this is a country of free speech so long as you don't report it to that Socialist Gillian Triggs, the ABC or Tony Jones one can feel reasonable safe..


Be careful  your eyes don't roll back into your head and stay there.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 November 2016)

noco said:


> And a typical reply from  true Fabian who only knows one response....
> 
> Rumpy, you can vilify me ......you can abuse me...you can character assassinate me all you like, but you will never ever silence me on this Forum as long as I live.....You have no hope in hell of pushing me off and that is what you and you and your  socialists buddies try to do to members who disagree with you.
> 
> ...




 You are always good for a laugh noco , I guess it keeps you interested in life. 

Imho you could learn a few lessons from drsmith, who I'm pretty sure is a Liberal supporter if not a member, but who can still take a balanced and analytical issue by issue approach instead of just swallowing the propaganda that comes out of Party Central. 

Do yourself (and us) a favour by doing some research instead of propaganda Copy/Paste.


----------



## Tisme (26 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Barnaby's pork barrelling to cost taxpayers $25 million for no good reason.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-...dicines-authority-allowed-to-relocate/7996372




Old skool politician.


I see Mr Brandis is in deep trying to finagle monies from the corpse of Bell Corp to help the Liberal Govt in WA. The High Court might not take that lightly in the future if the Labor Party has the balls to use the courts like the LNP frequently does. It appears to be one of the secret triggers for the departure of would be compromised Justin Gleeson


----------



## noco (26 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You are always good for a laugh noco , I guess it keeps you interested in life.
> 
> Imho you could learn a few lessons from drsmith, who I'm pretty sure is a Liberal supporter if not a member, but who can still take a balanced and analytical issue by issue approach instead of just swallowing the propaganda that comes out of Party Central.
> 
> Do yourself (and us) a favour by doing some research instead of propaganda Copy/Paste.




Mate I have done lots of research and have caught you out on many occasion and you did not like it.....

The only response you know in most cases is to attack the man......I can point to you on this forum where I have been critical of Malcom Turnbull.

I think you should do yourself a favor and listen to what other people think and say instead   of taking the Fabian attitude of, "IT IS MY WAY OR THE HIGH WAY".....You always profess to being right...Stop being PIG HEADED  for a change.

I am certain you would like to see me off the ASF due to your persistent personal attacks....That is the Fabian way......Perhaps you should check them out because you follow the same pattern when you are beaten.

If you don't know where to look, just let me know and I will get all your needs.


----------



## luutzu (26 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> Are you confusing assimilation and imperialism?




Can't break that habit of concision, can you?  

Yes, I was a bit confused there.


----------



## luutzu (26 November 2016)

noco said:


> I guess it all depends how you want to look at things.......You can exaggerate a bit if you want to.
> 
> It is just that you said you not know what her policies are or what she stood for and I presented them to you.
> 
> If you don't like what she stands for then don't vote for her...Maybe you prefer socialism (Communism)...I don't really know which side of the fence you stand and I don't really give a rat's a$se.




Don't think I was exaggerating. I simply follow your link to One Nation's policies and read a few of them.

Her (party) policies sounds like a typical political argy bargy clap trap to me. 

Take her position on CSG. It sounds more like an invitation to be convinced that it's safe. i.e., pay me a visit oil men. I mean, why take a position against something when you aren't exactly sure whether it's safe or not. if it's not safe, hence you are against it, then what more do you need to be convinced of? Trying to be fair and open to reasonable arguments?


----------



## noco (26 November 2016)

luutzu said:


> Don't think I was exaggerating. I simply follow your link to One Nation's policies and read a few of them.
> 
> Her (party) policies sounds like a typical political argy bargy clap trap to me.
> 
> Take her position on CSG. It sounds more like an invitation to be convinced that it's safe. i.e., pay me a visit oil men. I mean, why take a position against something when you aren't exactly sure whether it's safe or not. if it's not safe, hence you are against it, then what more do you need to be convinced of? Trying to be fair and open to reasonable arguments?




Whether you are for or against her policies is your opinion and you are entitled to it.....I have not said I agree with her policies 100%.....Some are good and some are not so good.

Initially you stated  she had no policies and I merely helped you to find what she stands for....What ever her policies maybe she would have little hope of implementing them due to being a minor party......But I guess she could be influential if she had the balance of power which may very well happen at the next Queensland state elections..

She must be doing something right when she has increased her popularity in Queensland from 5% to 16% since the 2016Federal election and well above the Greens.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 November 2016)

Abbott is making a nuisance of himself again...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-...rnment-to-look-at-his-budget-policies/8061584


----------



## noco (27 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Abbott is making a nuisance of himself again...
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-...rnment-to-look-at-his-budget-policies/8061584




But Rumpy, you must confess, what Abbott is saying is correct in every sense of the word and he is entitled to make his comments as a back bencher....He is saying the senate is sabotaging the Australian economy and he is so right.

If Turnbull had any sense, he would bring Abbott back into cabinet just to have control over him.

*Former Prime Minister Tony Abbott has criticised crossbench senators for blocking the government's agenda, claiming the upper house is 'sabotaging the country's future.'

With parliament set to wrap up for the year this week, the government's proposed legislation to reintroduce the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC) and the backpacker tax is stalled in the Senate.

The government's attempts to pass its legislative agenda have hit another roadblock, with Senator Nick Xenophon vowing to hold up legislation until the Murray-Darling basin dispute is resolved.

Mr Abbott told Sky News the current roadblock in the Senate is a 'recipe for bad government.'

'We have got an absolutely intransigent Labor party, which is completely abandoned the legacy of Bob Hawke and Paul Keating,' he said.

'And you've got individual senators who say their pet issue trumps all other pet issues and the Senate will deal with nothing until it deals with their pet issue.'

'This is a recipe for bad government and it is sabotaging the country's future.'

The Prime Minister also hinted he is willing to return to cabinet, saying he can work with his successor Malcolm Turnbull.

'Obviously there's been a bit of history with Malcolm and going back decades now. But look, you don't have to idolise someone to be able to work with them.'

'The important is to focus on the job at hand.'

'I am very conscious of the fact that its the PM who decides who enters the cabinet. It's not a matter for me and while I'm to the back bench to speak out and im going to make the most of it.'

Mr Abbott also says the prime minister is doing a better job at focussing on issues people care about and not worrying about 'about innovation and agility because, quite frankly, that loses people.'

The Member for Warringah says despite the increasing popularity of One Nation, he is not concerned about a breakaway party on the right.

'If we lack a strong centre-right party you'll get people on the fringes come to the fore,' he said.

'What the government is expected to do is not to overreact to Hanson, but to get on with the job of being a strong and sensible centre-right government.'

'Have strong, centre-right values, be firm in articulating centre-right values, and that will minimise the threat for the right.'

The former prime minister says the government must continue to push for budget repair to prevent 'intergenerational theft.'

"There needs to be a big new push for budget repair as we don't want to rip off our children and grandchildren it's intergenerational theft,' he said.

'It does have to be done, it won't be easy, but this is where the government has to have that tough conversation with the Australian people."

'We can't go on, indulging in a cash splash with borrowed money.'

Mr Abbott has been a member for the Sydney seat of Warringah since 1994, and says he has no plans to retire in the foreseeable future.

'My current mission is to be the best local member,' he said.
- See more at: http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-...the-country--abbott.html#sthash.91fDkOUM.dpuf*


----------



## pixel (27 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Abbott is making a nuisance of himself again...
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-...rnment-to-look-at-his-budget-policies/8061584




It's only natural: Abbott had almost 5 years' experience as leader of the opposition, far longer than as PM.
That gave him lots more practice in damaging a government than leading one.

Shorten won't mind; help from the inside can only raise his chances of becoming the next PM.


----------



## Tisme (28 November 2016)

luutzu said:


> Can't break that habit of concision, can you?
> 
> Yes, I was a bit confused there.




Nothing more dangerous than an honest man luutzu .... cudos to you.


----------



## Tisme (28 November 2016)

noco said:


> ......I can point to you on this forum where I have been critical of Malcom Turnbull.....
> 
> .




Who hasn't? 

You do appear to be having trouble breaking away from habitual Liberal party partisanship, which is rather intriguing given the divergent LNP is not much in common with its original foundations. Similarly the ALP. 


Malcolm is another one of those once considered contrary to the national interest and public service by the two majors and the general population. Since they had their shackles removed we have seen Catholic politics become the  dominant policy driver ..... opportunists instead of sages are in charge of both sides of the fence..


----------



## luutzu (28 November 2016)

noco said:


> Whether you are for or against her policies is your opinion and you are entitled to it.....I have not said I agree with her policies 100%.....Some are good and some are not so good.
> 
> Initially you stated  she had no policies and I merely helped you to find what she stands for....What ever her policies maybe she would have little hope of implementing them due to being a minor party......But I guess she could be influential if she had the balance of power which may very well happen at the next Queensland state elections..
> 
> She must be doing something right when she has increased her popularity in Queensland from 5% to 16% since the 2016Federal election and well above the Greens.




I'm no political pundits but seems to me she's getting her 15 minutes, again, because people are fed up with the bs they're getting from the two major parties.

That and her humble beginning, "plain" speaking and flag wrapping style make it seem like she's as honest and fair dinkum as the average Aussie - and so will fight for them.

Having read some of her policies, thanks btw, she has, like most pollies, have drunk the cool-aid of toughlove for the poor (of all colours) and more welfare for the "go-getter" with deep pockets who will share some if they get some more.


I don't know, I prefer those rich, silverspoon up the azz politicians who's out for themselves and their pals over those who came from poverty and the working class but sold the people out.

At least with the bluebloods, you can understand that they were brought up in gated community and have never known or seen much poverty and struggles. People tend not to be too imaginative about walking in other people's shoes.

People like Hanson, on the other hand... it's prostitution. And that's an insult to prostitutes in the red light district who have to to survive.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 November 2016)

Morrison was on tv this morning full of righteous indignation in attacking the Labor part for being "economic vandals" in not supporting his backpacker tax .

How full of bull is he ? This tax will raise about $100 million a year when HIS deficit is $30 *billion* a year. We are hardly going to have a backpacker led recovery of the economy are we ?

This government should stop nibbling around the margins and get down to some real heavy lifting. Cut out Howard's middle class welfare (negative gearing, superannuation rorts etc) instead of focussing on minutiae. They really are hopeless.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 November 2016)

One thing I agree with Trump on.

Scrap the TPP, it's a disaster.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-28/scrapping-tpp-won't-make-a-lick-of-difference/8061906


----------



## luutzu (28 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Morrison was on tv this morning full of righteous indignation in attacking the Labor part for being "economic vandals" in not supporting his backpacker tax .
> 
> How full of bull is he ? This tax will raise about $100 million a year when HIS deficit is $30 *billion* a year. We are hardly going to have a backpacker led recovery of the economy are we ?
> 
> This government should stop nibbling around the margins and get down to some real heavy lifting. Cut out Howard's middle class welfare (negative gearing, superannuation rorts etc) instead of focussing on minutiae. They really are hopeless.




They do add up, eventually


----------



## noco (28 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Morrison was on tv this morning full of righteous indignation in attacking the Labor part for being "economic vandals" in not supporting his backpacker tax .
> 
> How full of bull is he ? This tax will raise about $100 million a year when HIS deficit is $30 *billion* a year. We are hardly going to have a backpacker led recovery of the economy are we ?
> 
> This government should stop nibbling around the margins and get down to some real heavy lifting. Cut out Howard's middle class welfare (negative gearing, superannuation rorts etc) instead of focussing on minutiae. They really are hopeless.




Need I remind you how and when all this economic mess started and the reason why we are still in the economic doldrums. 

Even if the government tries to do all the things you suggest, the bloody minded Green/Labor left wing socialists will block it for some stupid reason.....Labor is hopeless when it comes to bi-partisan support in the National interest.....Labor agrees on things one day but for political advantage back flips the next day.

Labor is currently holding up $19 billion in savings just to make the Government's bottom line look bad......


----------



## orr (28 November 2016)

pixel said:


> Abbott had almost 5 years' experience as leader of the opposition, far longer than as PM.
> That gave him lots more practice in damaging a government than leading one.




Given this and adding his time spent as a parliamentarian and his current avowed crusade for 'Budget Repair'.
I'm more and more curious as to how we are now in the predicament of selling our Liquid Natural Gas and netting a return to the Australian Treasury at roughly 3% of the equivalent return that Qatar sees for the sale of the same national asset.

Form 2022 Qatar will over the following 4 years recieve $100+Billion. Australia $3.3 billion... So Tony, How did this happen?  What's being done about it? Why isn't it addressed and used for 'Budget Repair'? Why is it the Middle Easterners have been able to negotiate so superior a deal? 

No small reason why this is the 'Turnbull Gov' thread... but not for much longer if this isn't fixed; mr s morrison... 

One of the riggs down in the Bass Straight is called 'Kipper'... Any up on the N/West shelf called 'Dun-over'?


----------



## noco (28 November 2016)

orr said:


> Given this and adding his time spent as a parliamentarian and his current avowed crusade for 'Budget Repair'.
> I'm more and more curious as to how we are now in the predicament of selling our Liquid Natural Gas and netting a return to the Australian Treasury at roughly 3% of the equivalent return that Qatar sees for the sale of the same national asset.
> 
> Form 2022 Qatar will over the following 4 years recieve $100+Billion. Australia $3.3 billion... So Tony, How did this happen?  What's being done about it? Why isn't it addressed and used for 'Budget Repair'? Why is it the Middle Easterners have been able to negotiate so superior a deal?
> ...




I think if you some research, and I do recall this was mentioned in a post some months ago, the difference in what Australia receives in comparison between Qatar is the fact that Australia has had no capital input into our gas where as the Qatar Government has invested over half the capital expenditure.

I will try to find that post for you.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-qatar-energy-idUSBRE95P0A420130626

Qatar is by far the world's largest exporter of LNG, with 105.4 bcm of exports in 2012 representing nearly a third of global LNG trade, according to BP data.

LNG production is divided between two companies, Qatargas and Rasgas. *State oil company Qatar Petroleum (QP) owns a majority stake in both, with international companies holding smaller stakes in individual production trains.*

http://www.afr.com/news/world/middl...-it-the-new-energy-superpower-20150806-gisvax

After investing tens of billions of dollars, Qatar is at the forefront. Part of the emirate's fleet, the Al Rekayyat, run by Royal Dutch Shell, goes to Fujian in China and Yokkaichi in Japan, as well as Dubai and Milford Haven in Wales.

Read more: http://www.afr.com/news/world/middl...ergy-superpower-20150806-gisvax#ixzz4RGIK0Mj2


----------



## Tisme (28 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Morrison was on tv this morning full of righteous indignation in attacking the Labor part for being "economic vandals" in not supporting his backpacker tax .
> 
> How full of bull is he ? This tax will raise about $100 million a year when HIS deficit is $30 *billion* a year. We are hardly going to have a backpacker led recovery of the economy are we ?
> 
> This government should stop nibbling around the margins and get down to some real heavy lifting. Cut out Howard's middle class welfare (negative gearing, superannuation rorts etc) instead of focussing on minutiae. They really are hopeless.




I seem to recall we were going to have a productivity led recovery rather than a cutting back on pencils and rubbers austerity measures. 

Surely the back packers are the glimpse of our future workforce conditions and pay under the draconian LNP class system, therefore making sure the base tax is higher than the Labs and Greens wants.

Remember (as trolls would have it) we are nothing if we don't work hard, rather than smart, for a few shiney coins and knowing you are doing it for good of the languishing the economy under the stewardship of the current do nothing govt.

How people, who have demonstrated no ability to negotiate with their political opponents, with p:ss poor acumen remain in the top jobs is an astounding admission of below par average as are those who defend it by blaming people who aren't even the elected and ensconced in govt. 

If the govt was a corporation, the shareholders would have demanded a spill by now, a new board and CEO. There would be no acceptable excuses for not competing with the enemy and making a profit. They certainly wouldn't give 2 s4its whether there was factions in the executive levels or not, just results.


----------



## noco (28 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> I seem to recall we were going to have a productivity led recovery rather than a cutting back on pencils and rubbers austerity measures.
> 
> Surely the back packers are the glimpse of our future workforce conditions and pay under the draconian LNP class system, therefore making sure the base tax is higher than the Labs and Greens wants.
> 
> ...




You may as well go and hit your head against a brick wall rather than trying to negotiate with the Green/Labor left wing socialist coalition.

Labor will oppose anything even though they could have been in agreement 2,3 or 5 years ago.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 November 2016)

noco said:


> Labor will oppose anything even though they could have been in agreement 2,3 or 5 years ago.




They obviously took lessons from Tony Abbott.


----------



## noco (28 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> They obviously took lessons from Tony Abbott.




So I guess if Shorten put his head in the fire, you would follow suit.


----------



## Smurf1976 (28 November 2016)

noco said:


> I think if you some research, and I do recall this was mentioned in a post some months ago, the difference in what Australia receives in comparison between Qatar is the fact that Australia has had no capital input into our gas where as the Qatar Government has invested over half the capital expenditure.




Increased gas costs to Australian industry and households in the eastern states (including SA and Tas) = over $2 billion per annum following the commencement of LNG exports from Qld.

Return to government = $800 million and that includes exports from NT and WA.

Regardless of who owns it, I don't see how this is a good deal as a whole. For what it's worth, the cost impact on gas consumers is considerably higher than the carbon tax was.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 November 2016)

noco said:


> So I guess if Shorten put his head in the fire, you would follow suit.




Labor would never accept a $7 GP co-payment especially as it wasn't mentioned before the election.

Here is just one way the Abbott/Turnbull government has stuffed up the Budget.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-28/fact-check-direct-action-vs-carbon-tax/6847234



> I think if you some research, and I do recall this was mentioned in a post some months ago, the difference in what Australia receives in comparison between Qatar is the fact that Australia has had no capital input into our gas where as the Qatar Government has invested over half the capital expenditure.




It doesn't really matter what our investment was, if you have a lot of valuable stuff lying around in your backyard and you let other people take it away for little return to the owners, then you are a fool.


----------



## noco (28 November 2016)

Smurf1976 said:


> Increased gas costs to Australian industry and households in the eastern states (including SA and Tas) = over $2 billion per annum following the commencement of LNG exports from Qld.
> 
> Return to government = $800 million and that includes exports from NT and WA.
> 
> Regardless of who owns it, I don't see how this is a good deal as a whole. For what it's worth, the cost impact on gas consumers is considerably higher than the carbon tax was.




Firstly there is a thing in the market called competition and Qatar is dirt cheap.

Secondly, if you were to invest your money into venture, I am sure you would like a healthy return on your funds and that is what the Qatar Government has done.

The Australian Government has no investment in the LNG but gets a return as you have stated of 3%.......Not bad hey...The LNG industry in Australia is funded by private enterprise.

I don't know of any easier way to explain it to you.

But of course if Australia converted to Socialism and took over those industries, known as central control, it would then become a debacle as is the case in most communist countries.


----------



## Boggo (28 November 2016)

When I checked my PO box this arvo it had a calendar in an envelope from the local Liberal MP (David Spiers) which I proceeded to throw in the post office bin on top of about a dozen other calendars that were unopened.

Why the heck are we being "gifted"  something we don't want at taxpayers expense, waste of money imo.


----------



## noco (28 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Labor would never accept a $7 GP co-payment especially as it wasn't mentioned before the election.
> 
> Here is just one way the Abbott/Turnbull government has stuffed up the Budget.
> 
> ...




Absolutely no comparison Rumpy.......Somebody has to invest in the infrastructure to get the LNG out of the ground, convert it to liquid at something like -167 c and then transport out of the country.

You say it does not matter what our investment was!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!......That is the point I am trying to get through to you Smurf, the Australian Government has not invested one cent into the infrastructure of the LNG industry.

You don't seem to understand how business works.

*Labor would never accept a $7 GP co-payment especially as it wasn't mentioned before the election.*
*
Julia Gillard  said 7 days before the 2010 election, "THERE WILL BE NO CARBON TAX UNDER A GOVERNMENT I LEAD"* and with the signed agreement with the Greens (Gillard/Brown) there was a carbon tax and the people of Australia had no choice because Gillard  had the numbers in the senate and rammed it through.....So don't crow to me about Labor not accepting the $7 GP co-payment.

You are always very one sided or maybe you have a short memory and it always gives me great pleasure in reminding you of Labor's history.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 November 2016)

noco said:


> Absolutely no comparison Rumpy.......Somebody has to invest in the infrastructure to get the LNG out of the ground, convert it to liquid at something like -167 c and then transport out of the country.
> 
> You say it does not matter what our investment was!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!......That is the point I am trying to get through to you Smurf, the Australian Government has not invested one cent into the infrastructure of the LNG industry.
> 
> ...




The oil and gas industry still invests in Norway with a 78% oil and gas tax, and Norwegians are now one of the wealthiest people on earth per capita.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/business...as-tax-norway-pm/story-e6frg2r3-1226218409771

And I don't care what Julia Gillard said, she got thrown out.


----------



## noco (28 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The oil and gas industry still invests in Norway with a 78% oil and gas tax, and Norwegians are now one of the wealthiest people on earth per capita.
> 
> http://www.perthnow.com.au/business...as-tax-norway-pm/story-e6frg2r3-1226218409771
> 
> And I don't care what Julia Gillard said, she got thrown out.




Rumpy you are a past master at cherry picking.....You SHOULD have explained to ASF viewers how that tax works and how the oil investors can claim there cost against that MRRT.


NORWAY'S Prime Minister has spruiked the benefits of his country's oil and gas industry tax while in Perth today amid suggesting Australia's controversial mining tax should not necessarily follow suit.  

Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, in Perth to officially open the world’s largest offshore marine simulator - Norwegian company Farstad Shipping’s $20 million offshore simulation centre (FSOSC) located at Bibra Lake - provided an overview of his nation’s successful system which taxes oil revenue at a world-leading 78 per cent.

Treasury has predicted that the controversial minerals resource rent tax (MRRT) will raise $11 billion in its first three years after lobbing a 30 per cent tax on iron ore and coal mining companies’ profits.

Mr Stoltenberg described how Norway’s “special system for the oil and gas industry” worked well because of its equitable benefits for the nation’s economy and industry.

“They (oil and gas companies) have quite high tax rates,” Mr Stoltenberg told PerthNow.

“*But, on the other hand, the industry is allowed to deduct all their expenses against the higher tax rates so, in a way, the industry pay higher taxes but they also deduct the costs against the tax rate so, in that, it’s not so heavy a tax burden.”

Mr Stoltenberg said the 78 per cent tax has not negatively affected local foreign investment in the lucrative sector.

“That works well,” he added.

“They can deduct 78 per cent of their costs, so you have to see both sides of the coin.”*


BTW....THAT ARTICLE WAS DATED BACK IN 2011 DURING THE GILLARD ERA.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 November 2016)

noco said:


> “They can deduct 78 per cent of their costs, so you have to see both sides of the coin.”[/B]
> Further more that article is dated back in 2011.




A. The principle still applies

B. If it's a good deal for everyone, where is the problem ?


----------



## noco (28 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> A. The principle still applies
> 
> B. If it's a good deal for everyone, where is the problem ?




The problem lays squarely at your feet because you have tried to make out Norway recoups a net figure of 78% on oil and that is not the case.

I know you do not like to be corrected so perhaps you should be honest and up front in the first place with the relevant information..

https://www2.deloitte.com/content/d...sources/gx-er-oil-and-gas-taxguide-norway.pdf


----------



## SirRumpole (28 November 2016)

noco said:


> The problem lays squarely at your feet because you have tried to make out Norway recoups a net figure of 78% on oil and that is not the case.
> 
> I know you do not like to be corrected so perhaps you should be honest and up front in the first place with the relevant information..
> 
> https://www2.deloitte.com/content/d...sources/gx-er-oil-and-gas-taxguide-norway.pdf




I made no claims about net return, I said the tax was 78 % which it is.

Norway has the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world and something like that would pay off our debt with money left over. 

Why not ?

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ustralia-a-thing-or-two-about-managing-wealth


----------



## Tisme (28 November 2016)

Boggo said:


> When I checked my PO box this arvo it had a calendar in an envelope from the local Liberal MP (David Spiers) which I proceeded to throw in the post office bin on top of about a dozen other calendars that were unopened.
> 
> Why the heck are we being "gifted"  something we don't want at taxpayers expense, waste of money imo.




It's a ruse. They do a bulk deal with other members of the party, declare the value at small run high cost and pocket the rest of the allowance.


----------



## Boggo (28 November 2016)

Tisme said:


> It's a ruse. They do a bulk deal with other members of the party, declare the value at small run high cost and pocket the rest of the allowance.




Scoundrels


----------



## noco (28 November 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I made no claims about net return, I said the tax was 78 % which it is.
> 
> Norway has the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world and something like that would pay off our debt with money left over.
> 
> ...




But with your deception you tried to make ASF viewers believe it was a net 78%.....Please don't try to wriggle out of it.......You know what you said.


----------



## orr (29 November 2016)

Another example of the ALP Governing from opposition; 
(those with a memory long enough to remember the policy's taken to the last federal election...)

As difficult as it may seem to be to the right of Gnegas Kahn whilest still being some type of confabulation of christian puritan Mike Biard does the gymnastic 10 as awarded from all judges...those with an interest my whish to cross check the over lap of the 'Pepsodent Kids' dad's old seat and our current treasurer. 

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...ederal-liberals-over-negative-gearing-changes

Negative gearing as it currently applies is the festering  ulcer of inequity blighting the socio-economic landscape of this 'c-untry' ... Biard's nervousness  only highlights this point.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 November 2016)

Good on you Nick !

This is the sort of pragmatism we need to get the country back on it's feet, rather than the slavish devotion to "free market" ideology (which doesn't exist anyway).



> In a stunning capitulation to Nick Xenophon, the Coalition has agreed to reverse a long-held policy and give Australian businesses an advantage in competing for taxpayer-funded projects.
> Key points:
> 
> Federal Government concedes to Nick Xenophon in order to get ABCC legislation through
> ...


----------



## drsmith (30 November 2016)

Is that Labor I see rotating in agony on the government's ABCC skewer ?


----------



## Tisme (1 December 2016)

Poor Malcolm thinks he's on a winner by constantly parroting on about everything being Labor and Bill Shorten's fault. Of course he fails to admit that if his ideas were so good he wouldn't need the ALP's vote at all and the Labor pollies could all go home for three years.

It would be interesting to tally up the % bipartisan votes versus partisan in the  Abbott/Turnbull reign as compared to the  Rudd/Gillard. My guess is that Abbott set the obstructionist bar to new consequently unvisited highs as opposition leader, but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise.


----------



## noco (1 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> Poor Malcolm thinks he's on a winner by constantly parroting on about everything being Labor and Bill Shorten's fault. Of course he fails to admit that if his ideas were so good he wouldn't need the ALP's vote at all and the Labor pollies could all go home for three years.
> 
> It would be interesting to tally up the % bipartisan votes versus partisan in the  Abbott/Turnbull reign as compared to the  Rudd/Gillard. My guess is that Abbott set the obstructionist bar to new consequently unvisited highs as opposition leader, but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise.




Tisme, I am sure you do not need to be reminded what happened 2007/2103.....Gillard/Rudd/Gillard...Rumpy came  up with the same tired old rhetoric and I had to remind him of the details which you can go back and check for yourself...

Look, the sooner the Labor admit to the debacle they created in that era the better.

Gillard relied on the vote of a HSU criminal who finished up in jail....He should have been stood down..She also had a friendly left wing senate.

Abbott took over the reigns and had to deal with a hostile senate.


----------



## Tisme (1 December 2016)

noco said:


> Tisme, I am sure you do not need to be reminded what happened 2007/2103.....Gillard/Rudd/Gillard...Rumpy came  up with the same tired old rhetoric and I had to remind him of the details which you can go back and check for yourself...
> 
> Look, the sooner the Labor admit to the debacle they created in that era the better.
> 
> ...





Sorry cobber you lost me there.... relevance? 

:bonk:


----------



## drsmith (1 December 2016)

Derryn Hinch defending his position for a 13% tax rate for backpackers in a presser today,



> All I want to do is get a deal done, at some figure.
> 
> I didn't care if it was 10 or if it was 15, I originally voted for 19.




Labor after following Jacquie Lambie to 10.5% has now followed the 3 senators holding out for 13%.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-01/politics-live-december-1/8081808


----------



## SirRumpole (1 December 2016)

Barnaby Joyce and Turnbull in Question Time. A couple of moronic jackasses. Asked about his government's 'achievements' , all Turnbull could do was attack Shorten and the Labor Party. Joyce just rambled like an idiot.

And the country is being 'run' by these two ?

God help us.


----------



## noco (1 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Barnaby Joyce and Turnbull in Question Time. A couple of moronic jackasses. Asked about his government's 'achievements' , all Turnbull could do was attack Shorten and the Labor Party. Joyce just rambled like an idiot.
> 
> And the country is being 'run' by these two ?
> 
> God help us.




Well, when the questioner ask about any alternatives the answer is given about the grinning  jackass  sitting opposite...So what do you expect.

You are obviously upset about the ABCC being passed to curtail Bill Shortens bosses in the CFMEU...

Rumpy, take it like a grown boy...You don't have to take your bat and ball and go home.....Join in the game.


----------



## drsmith (1 December 2016)

Some info on the background behind one of Derryn Hinch's advisors,



> The Nationals suspect Hinch adviser John Clements, who worked for Tony Windsor and the Palmer United Party, and has an awkward relationship with the Nationals.




http://www.afr.com/news/politics/derryn-hinch-just-another-politician-20161130-gt1c4y


----------



## pixel (1 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Barnaby Joyce and Turnbull in Question Time. A couple of moronic jackasses. Asked about his government's 'achievements' , all Turnbull could do was attack Shorten and the Labor Party. Joyce just rambled like an idiot.
> 
> And the country is being 'run' by these two ?
> 
> God help us.




Think of all the money our Reps and Sens were paid for the time and effort wasted on discussing the hare-brained idea of a backpacker tax! Had that money been handed to the Tax Office, the Total could well exceed the net takings of the tax itself - especially when you include the administration effort to implement it and deal with the inevitable complaints and stuff-ups. 
That aside, Australia will lose a lot of goodwill from backpackers and other tourists who, in the past, would've been quite happy to subsidise the cost of their holiday, meaning they left all their earnings in the country anyway. Thinking of all the kerfuffle and discussion, they will feel less appreciated, which makes them less enthusiastic to accept the conditions of the work on offer, which is often physically demanding and/or dirty.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 December 2016)

pixel said:


> Think of all the money our Reps and Sens were paid for the time and effort wasted on discussing the hare-brained idea of a backpacker tax! Had that money been handed to the Tax Office, the Total could well exceed the net takings of the tax itself - especially when you include the administration effort to implement it and deal with the inevitable complaints and stuff-ups.
> That aside, Australia will lose a lot of goodwill from backpackers and other tourists who, in the past, would've been quite happy to subsidise the cost of their holiday, meaning they left all their earnings in the country anyway. Thinking of all the kerfuffle and discussion, they will feel less appreciated, which makes them less enthusiastic to accept the conditions of the work on offer, which is often physically demanding and/or dirty.




Yes I agree. It was a very cheap money grab from a government without the guts to claw money back from those who can afford it, like negative gearing and superannuated millionaires.


----------



## pixel (1 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes I agree. It was a very cheap money grab from a government without the guts to claw money back from those who can afford it, like negative gearing and superannuated millionaires.




That is one aspect of it.
Another is, our Governments (and parliamentarians at large) have become so gutless, lacking ideas and vision, that they outsource all decisions to lobbyists, consultants - both inside the public service and outside - and pollsters, rather than going on with the business of governing by discussing the important issues and standing by a consensus decision that the majority of parliament can agree upon.

Imagine a consultant finding two solutions to a problem that some sector may perceive as such, e.g. the observation that backpackers don't pay tax on a bit of pocket money  they earn:
1. do nothing because it's disingenuous, alienates the workers and their casual employers, and costs heaps to administer fairly
2. set up committees with stakeholders, more consultants (preferably from one's own company), gauge several rates of taxation, set policies and rules for implementation, and provide ongoing contracts for consultants and auditors to ensure fair and equitable administration of the new laws. Based on initial (maybe very optimistic) assumptions, the additional tax take of the first four years will just about cover the overheads of the initial planning and implementation; from year 5 onward, a small surplus may eventuate.

*Will the consultant advise against his personal interest in job security and recommend option 1?*


----------



## noco (1 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes I agree. It was a very cheap money grab from a government without the guts to claw money back from those who can afford it, like negative gearing and superannuated millionaires.




Dear old Swannie (the goose) wanted to hit them with 32.5 %.


----------



## Tisme (1 December 2016)

noco said:


> Dear old Swannie (the goose) wanted to hit them with 32.5 %.




So did the LNP.

So they gifted the greens with $100m land remediation grant in return for $60m tax take.

Doesn't matter though because, according to Malcolm, its the ALP's fault. As I've said many times, the LNP exists only to oppose the ALP agenda. 

He/they behave like the snitch in front of the head master blaming the popular boy for the grass browning off in summer. Meanwhile the ALP are now sitting at 53% preferred and on the upward trajectory.


----------



## noco (1 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> So did the LNP.
> 
> So they gifted the greens with $100m land remediation grant in return for $60m tax take.
> 
> ...



*

*


Tisme, I think you might be behind the times...Things have changed a bit recently.


http://www.essentialvision.com.au/category/essentialreport

Both Labor and the Greens vote is down...One Nation is up.

Now 51/49 Labor/Liberal.

Turnbull is still the preferred Prime Minister which must be a worry to the Labor Party.


----------



## drsmith (1 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> So they gifted the greens with $100m land remediation grant in return for $60m tax take.



It's worse than that as most of the $60m tax take from the extra 2% in the backpacker tax is lost through a reduction in the tax on their employer superannuation contributions from 95% to 65%. The government got its headline rate however that Labor was so bitterly fighting.

Labor gambled that the prospect of no deal would split the Nats and lost leaving them looking like the political opportunists they have been and Derryn Hinch has been left looking a bit like an idiot.


----------



## Tisme (1 December 2016)

drsmith said:


> It's worse than that as most of the $60m tax take from the extra 2% in the backpacker tax is lost through a reduction in the tax on their employer superannuation contributions from 95% to 65%. The government got its headline rate however that Labor was so bitterly fighting.
> 
> Labor gambled that the prospect of no deal would split the Nats and lost leaving them looking like the political opportunists they have been and Derryn Hinch has been left looking a bit like an idiot.




agreed


----------



## Tisme (2 December 2016)

noco said:


> [/B]
> 
> 
> Tisme, I think you might be behind the times...Things have changed a bit recently.
> ...




One Nation is a force majeure these days


----------



## Ves (2 December 2016)

Does anyone have an ELI5  for the 'backpackers tax'?

Previously it looks like they were taxed at the same rates as Australian residents. However, it looks like the government made some changes to the non-residents rules in the 15/16 budget  which meant that 'backpackers' who did seasonal work would be taxed at 32.5% for the first $80k of income they earn (normal margin rates after this) like other non-residents.  

Then someone realised that this might be a big problem as less people here would come out and actually do the kind of seasonal work attractive to 'backpackers.'  (Wouldn't this have been obvious when developing the policy change?)

So the rate,  after much debate,  has been lowered to 15%.

Why was it changed in the first place?  And why is it such a big 'win'  if it's just what looks like a change to a previous 15/16 Budget policy?


----------



## SirRumpole (2 December 2016)

Ves said:


> Why was it changed in the first place?  And why is it such a big 'win'  if it's just what looks like a change to a previous 15/16 Budget policy?




And how much difference will it make to a budget deficit of $30 billion a year ? Especially as they have had to pay off the Greens to get it through to the tune of $100 million.

Total waste of time from a total waste of a government.


----------



## Ves (2 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> And how much difference will it make to a budget deficit of $30 billion a year ? Especially as they have had to pay off the Greens to get it through to the tune of $100 million.
> 
> Total waste of time from a total waste of a government.



Yeah  I guess that's why I'm asking.   Most of the stuff I've read has either made me scratch my head or it's written in such a politicised fashion that it's useless.

The only way you get a higher total tax revenue base by reducing a tax is if more people are exposed to the tax....   so there's obviously a heap of forecasting and assumptions going on here.


----------



## Tisme (2 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> And how much difference will it make to a budget deficit of $30 billion a year ? Especially as they have had to pay off the Greens to get it through to the tune of $100 million.
> 
> Total waste of time from a total waste of a government.




Well listening to our treasurer this morning on ABC radio, he reckons it will reap ~$560m and whats more 70% of the Joe Hockey forward estimate is better than zero, so it won't put a dent in the budget, so there. 

Oh and the whole debacle has the ALP with its tail between its legs.


----------



## Tisme (2 December 2016)

Whatever happened to Parakeelia?


----------



## SirRumpole (2 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> Whatever happened to Parakeelia?




I suspect it's a case of "if you don't expose our rorts we won't expose yours".

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-23/bradley-explained:-the-liberal-party's-parakeelia-rort/7535372


----------



## dutchie (3 December 2016)

This applies to *all* political parties.

"I just wish that I had not voted... I have no faith in our government anymore at all. They all promise you the world at the end of a stick and take it away once they get in."

(from article at ZeroHedge)


----------



## noco (3 December 2016)

dutchie said:


> This applies to *all* political parties.
> 
> "I just wish that I had not voted... I have no faith in our government anymore at all. They all promise you the world at the end of a stick and take it away once they get in."
> 
> (from article at ZeroHedge)




What we need here in Oz is a Donald Hanson or a Pauline Trump.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 December 2016)

noco said:


> What we need here in Oz is a Donald Hanson or a Pauline Trump.




You mean like Clive Palmer ?


----------



## noco (3 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You mean like Clive Palmer ?




Mate, if Clive Palmer ever stepped foot on the ground in Townsville, no one could guarantee his safety.

There is no comparison.

He has created to so much pain and misery to hundreds of workers in Townsille who have had to upstakes with their families and move to another town for work.

But do you and Bill Shorten care?...Of you don't so long as it does not affect you.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 December 2016)

Lenore Taylor sums the year up quite well.

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...got-things-done-youve-tidied-your-sock-drawer


----------



## noco (3 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Lenore Taylor sums the year up quite well.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/austral...got-things-done-youve-tidied-your-sock-drawer




Ah yes.....the good old Commo paper the Guardian...self confessed to exaggerating the truth and especially from the lips of Lenore  Taylor that well known communist journalist.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 December 2016)

noco said:


> Ah yes.....the good old Commo paper the Guardian...self confessed to exaggerating the truth and especially from the lips of Lenore  Taylor that well known communist journalist.




You mean like Andrew Bolt is a Facist, or is he just a good bloke with sensible center ideas ?


----------



## noco (3 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You mean like Andrew Bolt is a Facist, or is he just a good bloke with sensible center ideas ?




They are your words not mine comrade.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 December 2016)

noco said:


> They are your words not mine comrade.




Ja Mein Fuhrer !


----------



## SirRumpole (5 December 2016)

Tisme,

You seem to have some experience in the building industry, what's your opinion of the ABCC legislation ?

It doesn't affect me either way I'm just interested in whether you think it's necessary, will it reduce safety on building sites, will it reduce costs etc, or is it just a union bashing exercise ?

Comments appreciated.


----------



## Tisme (5 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Tisme,
> 
> You seem to have some experience in the building industry, what's your opinion of the ABCC legislation ?
> 
> ...




The paper work that went with the National Code of Practice MkI was a leveraged piece that basically black mailed building companies and sub contracting companies into signing or no commonwealth work (this is still there in MII). It prescribed various "best practice" behaviours that were tantamount to making a solemn oath to do the govt's political bidding. Once signed every construction activity, regardless of the client had to be per the NCP, which meant of course a Labor State Govt project would be very hard to win.

I myself have had some fairly robust scraps with union reps and the impudence of someone telling who, what, when and where and to be hit from the otherside by a political game is just sheer antagonism. The thing that people don't know is that investment in commercial building was in a very large part federal govt funding because the free market economy was underlyingly sh1te, the construction industry couldn't survive any growth without taxpayer monies, so the legislation was a dagger.

Let's take Lend Lease as an example of a builder who has it's act together and a large player on the world stage. Lend Lease started out an idea of Dick Dusseldorp with Civil an Civic as the building arm. He had set up Civil and Civic using Dutch money for a consortium and subsequently bought it from them. C&C built the first High Rise (Caltex House)  in Oz, but because he was a migrant the banks wouldn't lend so he went off and got funding from Dutch royalty ( he swore he'd never go grovelling to a bank again and I remember how he took out CML, MLC and nearly inked in Westpac too in the 80's). GPT (general property trust) was the company formed to finance Civil and Civic, EPL, Environ's, etc works,  So what was his secret to success.......

he had a flat organisation that included all employees in the mix. In the 70's there was accords and understandings  with unions, safety on sites was paramount (its Lance Haslam invented catch cry was "Accidents don't happen, they are caused"), the wages were around 125% of award, medical was free, everyone rec'd profit share in the form of shares, trips to company owned Thredbo, lots of personal development training, Harvard courses, etc a great diversity of keen minds more interested in building than playing silly buggers with organised labor as excuse for poor management and negotiation skills. His company was a masterclass of how Hawke wanted Oz in the 80's.

So when this legislation comes back around and a post war company founded on European socialist/societal values, ranked by its world peers as in the top tiers, it will necessarily see the benefits of a EBA, whether it needs to be doing commonwealth govt funded projects or just keep fundng PPP's by itself or with consortiums like Brookfield Multiplex.

The thing is that Lend Lease, which has a traditional relationship with the Labor Party and the Unions (many of the building in Canberra were union owned, C&C built) has an advantage over its competitors because it doesn't rely on federal projects.

The work around fro smaller builders? Well just like with the EBAs, companies set up another company with the same name, except it has word added e.g. "Stockforums Services" which has no binding agreements with the Feds or the unions, or just one of the other.

Safety is a real problem insofar the regulations are so over the top with public service style rules, in reality workers don't really read all the SWMS and Safety Procedures. It has created a bullsh1t industry of safety officers and risk aversion hand cuffs that frustrates workers and probably causes accidents through haste from watchful eyes. The unions know this and that is why they enter sites to audit the basics on behalf of their membership, it is also a great way to gauge conditions, signup slave labourers and causing great grief to sub contractors who aren't doing as they are told by the site foreman who generally uses union clout  to slow a job down, stop work, etc for and extension of times.... can't get pinged for things out of your control.

The construction industry is run on rat cunning, bullying and primitive instincts. I like to say it's the second oldest profession after prostitution, because bothels need roofs and walls.

It really is a frontier mentality and no one over the many millenia has managed to legitimise it as mature industry. Of course investors are normally those in power, so there is no advantage to their ROI is low life workers are creaming the profits as benefits, so much better to attack organised labour than enforce fair payments to workers, subbies and suppliers. When you witness first hand ex Labor politicians brokering second mortgage mezzanine finance to developers (especially apartments), who they intend to wind up near the end of projects so they can liquidate the project for their security and surety of investments and 30% profit plus extras, you just know there are a lot of public out there who should know, but won't because the media has the same power elite also noses in the trough. 

The new kids on the block are the Catholic boys. They have stitched up Catholic Law firms, Catholic School boards, Catholic Building companies, Catholic Architects, Catholic Developers, Catholic Investment Funds, etc and the fit is perfect for the largely Catholic Liberal Party and not inconsiderable Catholic Labor Party (which Richard Court tried to kill off in Perth City Council). The old school tie is very strong in these people and we aren't talking the traditional Christian Lebs ( I think they are really Jewish genes) who dominated some sectors during the nineties.

Very complex industry with some stellar minds always in battle mode.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 December 2016)

Thanks Tis, a complex industry indeed...

I wonder if anyone in the government will be interested in this, or whether they will just cover up for their mates.

Employers 'short-changing' Australian workers by withholding superannuation payments, report says

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-...ralian-workers-correct-superannuation/8091300


----------



## SirRumpole (6 December 2016)

Funny how our "debt and deficit disaster" seems to have been forgotten, but it's still there.

What would most people regard as a reasonable profit margin these days ? 10% ?

Well get a load of this.



> Even when prices plunged earlier this year, the big iron ore miners were making a killing with a 50 per cent profit margin. That's now around 200 per cent.




Time for a serious Resources Rent Tax on OUR minerals as John Verrender explains.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-...faces-downgrade-to-economic-forecasts/8091678


----------



## Tisme (7 December 2016)

It's not a carbon tax.... it's not anything to do with anything LOL

Poor Josh Frydenburg being man handled by his own peers.  I can imagine he and Malcolm feel like captives to an implacable bunch of do nothings.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-climate-policy-backdown-20161206-gt5f50.html

Meanwhile  Peter Costello is maturing in years and common sense and has embarked on morphing into Paul Keating, the man who's changes made Peter look good as the mechanisms kicked in.

Ol' Pete has made a point of making a television appearance to explain to the low IQ party partisans that things like back packer taxes are irrelevant to the big picture.......oh duh

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-...-parliaments-time-says-peter-costello/8097294


----------



## Tisme (7 December 2016)

Well that cleared that up! Simon Birmingham was just on ABC 24 and he explained that it wasn't Josh Frydenberg afterall, but Bill Shorten and the Labor Party. I'm glad he cleared that up 

I don't know why my eyes and ears keep deceiving me ... maybe I need a new TV. 

Meanwhile I'm thinking of releasing a Xmas album for LNP supporters:  40 minutes of recursive "Blame Bill Shorten and the Labor Party"


----------



## SirRumpole (7 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> Well that cleared that up! Simon Birmingham was just on ABC 24 and he explained that it wasn't Josh Frydenberg afterall, but Bill Shorten and the Labor Party. I'm glad he cleared that up
> 
> I don't know why my eyes and ears keep deceiving me ... maybe I need a new TV.
> 
> Meanwhile I'm thinking of releasing a Xmas album for LNP supporters:  40 minutes of recursive "Blame Bill Shorten and the Labor Party"




Jut shows how weak Turnbull is. The socialist/communist/fabian conspiracy theorist nut jobs in the LNP have triumphed over science and rationalism . 

The LNP will never get anything worthwhile done in government. They are lame ducks swimming around waiting for someone to shoot them.

Pathetic.


----------



## Tisme (7 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Jut shows how weak Turnbull is. The socialist/communist/fabian conspiracy theorist nut jobs in the LNP have triumphed over science and rationalism .
> 
> The LNP will never get anything worthwhile done in government. They are lame ducks swimming around waiting for someone to shoot them.
> 
> Pathetic.




You'd think when the likes of Abbott and his Headquarters (News Corp) go down the cheap political gain road, they would consider well documented history of picking low hanging fruit: Shakespeare even wrote it into his famous play:



> *For 'tis the sport to have the enginer
> Hoist with his own petard*





Almost a decade of LNP hysteria mongering has come back to bite the likes of Josh and jelly kneed Malcolm. They have effectively closed the doors on any policy that is aggressive to do nothing  politics. Meanwhile the world around us is changing rapidly.

Malcolm should just go on holidays and not come back = do a Stephen Conroy, a David Cameron,  a John Key, a Matteo Renzi and just realise it ain't worth the poor health and grey hair that comes from trying to lead/coalesce with  the new breed of inflated egotist politicians who just want to be spoilers for fame.


----------



## noco (7 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Funny how our "debt and deficit disaster" seems to have been forgotten, but it's still there.
> 
> What would most people regard as a reasonable profit margin these days ? 10% ?
> 
> ...




Strange as it seem but the attached link paints a different picture presented by the ABC regarding iron ore profits......But then we all know how the ABC and the Guardian distort the truth don't we.

The latest iron ore price is US $48.99 tonne.......the break even point is between US $30 and $51 per tonne. 

http://www.fool.com.au/2015/07/10/which-iron-ore-miners-are-still-profitable-today/


----------



## Ves (7 December 2016)

noco said:


> Strange as it seem but the attached link paints a different picture presented by the ABC regarding iron ore profits......But then we all know how the ABC and the Guardian distort the truth don't we.
> 
> The latest iron ore price is US $48.99 tonne.......the break even point is between US $30 and $51 per tonne.
> 
> http://www.fool.com.au/2015/07/10/which-iron-ore-miners-are-still-profitable-today/



Those break even costs in the Motley Fool link are almost 18 months old. A lot has changed since then.

You will find that most of the big miners have been cutting costs and their break evens will subsequently be lower.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 December 2016)

The economy declined by 0.5% in the September quarter. Mr "jobs and growth" strikes again.


----------



## noco (7 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The economy declined by 0.5% in the September quarter. Mr "jobs and growth" strikes again.




Clap, clap, clap...That will make the Green/Labor left wing socialist coalition and its supporters more than happy and what are they doing to help?....Zilch, except more obstruction to make the government fail....What a bunch of cronies you Fabians are.


----------



## Tisme (7 December 2016)

The one they forgot is the scrapping of Fact Check at the ABC 




> _Some Achievements of the Abbott Government (2013-2015)
> 
> The Abbott Government was elected on a platform of building a stronger, more prosperous economy for a safe and secure Australia. Following six years of chaos and mismanagement, the Abbott Government moved quickly to clean up Labor’s mess.
> 
> ...




Just makes me all warm and fuzzy knowing we are in good hands for big ticket agendas


----------



## Tisme (7 December 2016)

Turnbull's legacy :

https://www.choice.com.au/electroni...g-to-the-internet/articles/nbn-rollout-update



> The government plans to have eight million premises connected by 2020, *although the original pre-election 2013 timeline promised the network completion by 2016.* The NBN is expected to be sold in 2021 when the rollout is completed and the remaining government debt will be re-financed through commercial partners.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> The one they forgot is the scrapping of Fact Check at the ABC
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Meanwhile our gas is being exported for very little return to us and our power generation infrastructure is falling to pieces. Yes, great achievements they have gained.


----------



## noco (8 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Meanwhile our gas is being exported for very little return to us and our power generation infrastructure is falling to pieces. Yes, great achievements they have gained.




Here we go again....How much has the government got invested in CSG?...What do you expect?..Rumpy we have been through all this before with Qatar...You have a very short memory.

Yes you are right for once, the general infrastructure is falling apart thanks to the Green/Labor left wing socialists coalition blowing up coal fired power stations in Victoria and South Australia....Making power so expensive and unreliable....Creating loss of jobs and heartache for business in SA....Power prices are expected to rise 10% in Victoria and SA in January causing more pain for the struggling pensioners and house holds.


----------



## dutchie (8 December 2016)

from Bill Leak, The Australian


----------



## SirRumpole (8 December 2016)

noco said:


> Here we go again....How much has the government got invested in CSG?...What do you expect?..Rumpy we have been through all this before with Qatar...You have a very short memory.




You just don't get it that we OWN the stuff and we are letting people take it away for no return to us. That's just stupid.



> Yes you are right for once, the general infrastructure is falling apart thanks to the Green/Labor left wing socialists coalition blowing up coal fired power stations in Victoria and South Australia....Making power so expensive and unreliable....Creating loss of jobs and heartache for business in SA....Power prices are expected to rise 10% in Victoria and SA in January causing more pain for the struggling pensioners and house holds.




Kennet sold Hazelwood and the commercial owners flogged it for maximum profit and didn't maintain it, so the inevitable has happened.


----------



## Tisme (8 December 2016)

Things aren't looking good for the govt's economic credentials. 

Using the same logic Howard/Costello used to beat their chests as economic managers on the back of seling our assets and a Keating incubated mining boom/open doors to China, Turnbull/Morrison should take the cudos for starting us down a slippery slope of negative growth.

You wouldn't want to be West Australian if the negative growth rate continues.

Why would there be 3 years of continuous private investment contraction when the LNP is supposed to be business friendly?

Why is the govt reducing spending when all other sectors are reducing?

Wayne Swan been consulted?


----------



## moXJO (8 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> Why would there be 3 years of continuous private investment contraction when the LNP is supposed to be business friendly?
> 
> Why is the govt reducing spending when all other sectors are reducing?
> 
> Wayne Swan been consulted?




Is it time we had a recession ?
We have had non stop growth and prices and attitudes reflect that. I think the worse thing labor did was overspend during the gfc. We were in a decent position back then. 

Prices are too high in this country. Grocery bills, rego, housing, rates,  power,  we must be close to peak pricing. There needs to be a reset. It can't keep going up and up. Public service lives in a fricking fantasy land with their pricing as well.

Imo retailers will have a hard time as people cut back.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 December 2016)

moXJO said:


> Imo retailers will have a hard time as people cut back.




Which is why is pretty pointless just cutting business taxes. If the consumers aren't spending, business doesn't make money.

Better to cut low and middle income taxes and get people spending which is going to increase business profits and increase tax receipts from GST and business tax.

Consumers run the economy and they are not spending right now because as you pointed out government charges and taxes are rising which eats away at discretionary spending ability.


----------



## Tisme (8 December 2016)

moXJO said:


> Is it time we had a recession ?
> We have had non stop growth and prices and attitudes reflect that. I think the worse thing labor did was overspend during the gfc. *We were in a decent position back then.
> *
> Prices are too high in this country. Grocery bills, rego, housing, rates,  power,  we must be close to peak pricing. There needs to be a reset. It can't keep going up and up. Public service lives in a fricking fantasy land with their pricing as well.
> ...




We'll never know if Labor got it right or not, but sure as s4it the Murdoch press will keep wringing it out for every last drop and the LNP rusted ons will keep lapping it up.

What is more important is what the governance is not what was promised. This govt has had one and a half terms to fulfill the story they invented about being good economic managers and able to turn a favourable debt payment outcome, all based on the same figures from finance and  treasury as the Labor Party had.

Instead the bleed has increased and no apparent gain to the man on the street. I would hazzard a guess and say the man on the Bondi tram is doing it tougher than the Murdoch Govt is letting on.


----------



## noco (8 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You just don't get it that we OWN the stuff and we are letting people take it away for no return to us. That's just stupid.
> 
> 
> 
> Kennet sold Hazelwood and the commercial owners flogged it for maximum profit and didn't maintain it, so the inevitable has happened.




I am sorry to say Rumpy but you are the one that does not get it.......Have you heard of a thing called royalties?
Have you heard of a thing called income tax?......That is what we get for no monies out laid....Private enterprise are the ones who have sunk in the infrastructure money and they are the ones who would expect a return.

From your past history of conversations you don't seem to understand how a business operates...I will ask you but I don't expect a sensible answer, have you ever owned a business?...Have you ever managed a business?..Or were you a public servant......If it were the two former ones then you should have some knowledge of how business works......Whether you like it or not, we live in a capitalist world where profits on funds invested are essential to stay in business........If you live in a socialist world where central control is their ideology, then you may be happy for a communist dictatorial government to take all.

Regarding Hazalwood power station and the coal fired power station in SA, why has the emphasis been placed on both state premiers for them closing these base load power stations......Jay Wetherill willing pressed the button to fell one of the chimney stacks....Both Premiers were as happy as larks...Gotta have more renewables they said 
and look where it has them today....more blackouts.....more jobs lost......less business investment.

Do you see it now or do I have to send you another message in braille ?


----------



## noco (8 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> We'll never know if Labor got it right or not, but sure as s4it the Murdoch press will keep wringing it out for every last drop and the LNP rusted ons will keep lapping it up.
> 
> What is more important is what the governance is not what was promised. This govt has had one and a half terms to fulfill the story they invented about being good economic managers and able to turn a favourable debt payment outcome, all based on the same figures from finance and  treasury as the Labor Party had.
> 
> Instead the bleed has increased and no apparent gain to the man on the street. I would hazzard a guess and say the man on the Bondi tram is doing it tougher than the Murdoch Govt is letting on.




I am confident in saying, things would have been far worse under Labor....Their history says it all.


----------



## Tisme (8 December 2016)

noco said:


> I am confident in saying, things would have been far worse under Labor....Their history says it all.




I'm no fan of Labor (Rumpole will attest to that), nor the LNP, but I'm not convinced we would have weathered the fallout without the massive pump priming. That is not to say there weren't programs that I disapprove of, but it's fairly obvious the monies are still washing through the system if investment has been going backwards, but the gdp growth has only just started to slow down.

We don't have a manufacturing industry to buffer us and essentially we are a services based economy, which means we don't have any inertia to carry us through large dips and peaks. Howard had already sold off the farm to make a large deposit into the public service super so we couldn't mortgage that.

Anyone who think ~$20b would have solved our problems is naive...... it would have evaporated in the wink of an eye as the unemployment sky rocketted.


Insofar as royalties, that is one of the major furphies that simpletons in News Corp like to bandy. The "boom" to the economy was the construction phase of the resource sector and all the feeder industries that value added. Those miners are now using the otherwise build costs and margins to pay down their debt as the gap between gross profit and nett profit closes. The royalties are a fairly negligible part of the $1.6 trillion economy


----------



## explod (8 December 2016)

This Government is becoming totally out of touch and inhuman in my view:

http://the-pen.co/government-threatens-welfare-recipients-jail/



> “It is appalling that the minister for human services is telling people on the lowest incomes three weeks before Christmas that if they have a debt with Centrelink they may go to prison,” Goldie said.
> 
> “This is false, highly irresponsible and risks causing a huge amount of unnecessary stress and anxiety amongst people who are already doing it tough.
> 
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (8 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> I'm no fan of Labor (Rumpole will attest to that), nor the LNP, but I'm not convinced we would have weathered the fallout without the massive pump priming. That is not to say there weren't programs that I disapprove of, but it's fairly obvious the monies are still washing through the system if investment has been going backwards, but the gdp growth has only just started to slow down.
> 
> We don't have a manufacturing industry to buffer us and essentially we are a services based economy, which means we don't have any inertia to carry us through large dips and peaks. Howard had already sold off the farm to make a large deposit into the public service super so we couldn't mortgage that.
> 
> ...





Excellent post.

I'm no great fan of Labor either, I just think they are the least worst option of the majors. The LNP are so business oriented that they forget about the consumers without whose spending power the economy would not exist.

Trickle down economics is bs. Spending drives the economy, investment comes later to satisfy demand.


----------



## noco (8 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Excellent post.
> 
> I'm no great fan of Labor either, I just think they are the least worst option of the majors. The LNP are so business oriented that they forget about the consumers without whose spending power the economy would not exist.
> 
> Trickle down economics is bs. Spending drives the economy, investment comes later to satisfy demand.




You, Tisme and Plod  are no great  fans of Labor but you are quite willing to give them your preference votes after the Greens......We all know the Greens jump into bed with Labor......It is a sort of a love/hate  relationship.....I hate  you but I can not do without you....I cannot live with you and I cannot live without you.


----------



## Tisme (8 December 2016)

noco said:


> You, Tisme and Plod  are no great  fans of Labor but you are quite willing to give them your preference votes after the Greens......We all know the Greens jump into bed with Labor......It is a sort of a love/hate  relationship.....I hate  you but I can not do without you....I cannot live with you and I cannot live without you.




More trolling and no substance to boot.  For a prima donna who impertinently tells people to grow up, you seem more than predisposed to sook and snot when your precious Liberal Party is exposed for the fraud it is.....how does that not equate to pot calling shiney kettle black?

If you are going to play venerable grown up telling us kiddies how it is, you could at the very least give credit where credit is due... it costs you nothing and the only people who will put the knife in are the drop kicks who are irrationally wedded to political tribe and jealous of those who say otherwise.


----------



## noco (8 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> More trolling and no substance to boot.  For a prima donna who impertinently tells people to grow up, you seem more than predisposed to sook and snot when your precious Liberal Party is exposed for the fraud it is.....how does that not equate to pot calling shiney kettle black?
> 
> If you are going to play venerable grown up telling us kiddies how it is, you could at the very least give credit where credit is due... it costs you nothing and the only people who will put the knife in are the drop kicks who are irrationally wedded to political tribe and jealous of those who say otherwise.




Tisme, I can only give you the facts as many others see it.....There is a love /hate relationship between the Greens and Labor.......You cannot deny it.

When ever you disagree with me I am accused of trolling....Get over it for FFS.

I am not trolling.....That seems to be your latest ridicule MANTRA lately.


----------



## sptrawler (8 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Excellent post.
> The LNP are so business oriented that they forget about the consumers without whose spending power the economy would not exist.




How would the consumers have spending power, if they don't have a job?
If business doesn't prosper, they don't employ people, then you don't have consumers.

Just a lot of people on welfare, that the government has to borrow from overseas to fund, or screw anyone who has money to fund.


----------



## sptrawler (8 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> The royalties are a fairly negligible part of the $1.6 trillion economy




Which is the biggest tragedy of all, when the resource is gone, so are the miners.

Then who pays the welfare?


----------



## sptrawler (8 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> We'll never know if Labor got it right or not, but sure as s4it the Murdoch press will keep wringing it out for every last drop and the LNP rusted ons will keep lapping it up.
> 
> What is more important is what the governance is not what was promised. This govt has had one and a half terms to fulfill the story they invented about being good economic managers and able to turn a favourable debt payment outcome, all based on the same figures from finance and  treasury as the Labor Party had.
> 
> Instead the bleed has increased and no apparent gain to the man on the street. I would hazzard a guess and say the man on the Bondi tram is doing it tougher than the Murdoch Govt is letting on.




Good old Conroy, champion of the aussie battler, has found a suitable position post politics.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...w-job--but-it-smells-bad-20161208-gt6to3.html

That's a Fairfax post, not Murdoch.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> How would the consumers have spending power, if they don't have a job?
> If business doesn't prosper, they don't employ people, then you don't have consumers.
> 
> Just a lot of people on welfare, that the government has to borrow from overseas to fund, or screw anyone who has money to fund.




People on welfare still have to buy food, pay the rent, feed the electricity companies, buy clothes etc. They are still consumers so they are helping businesses stay in business. 

In fact with ever expanding technology destroying more jobs we will have to get used to a bigger welfare state and we will have to tax business more to pay their consumers. No business is going to invest where there is no market.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Good old Conroy, champion of the aussie battler, has found a suitable position post politics.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...w-job--but-it-smells-bad-20161208-gt6to3.html
> 
> That's a Fairfax post, not Murdoch.




F. the gambling industry. Bloodsucking leeches. Shame on Conroy and anyone else who signs up with them.


----------



## noco (8 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> People on welfare still have to buy food, pay the rent, feed the electricity companies, buy clothes etc. They are still consumers so they are helping businesses stay in business.
> 
> In fact with ever expanding technology destroying more jobs we will have to get used to a bigger welfare state and we will have to tax business more to pay their consumers. No business is going to invest where there is no market.




  No business is going to invest in a country with higher taxes......Singapore  and Honk Kong are at 17%...The USA will be lowering their tax rate next year....We are in a very competitive world when it comes to taxation......No No...higher taxes is not the way to go....Higher taxes = less investment and higher unemployment.

People on welfare spend less and do without a lot of things to make ends meet.

What we need is more Dudd $900 cheques like we received in 2008....Now what do you think of that idea?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates


----------



## SirRumpole (8 December 2016)

noco said:


> No business is going to invest in a country with higher taxes......Singapore  and Honk Kong are at 17%...The USA will be lowering their tax rate next year....We are in a very competitive world when it comes to taxation......No No...higher taxes is not the way to go....Higher taxes = less investment and higher unemployment.




Businesses are more likely to "invest" in labour eliminating technology than jobs. Even the governments optimistic outlooks predict only a 1% increase in GDP in 20 years from it's planned business tax cuts. Big deal.

Small and medium businesses employ 70% of the workforce and they are unlikely to go elsewhere.


IMO if Trump goes ahead with his business tax cuts he will have to cut services or raise personal income tax to pay for them and he will be voted out at the next election.


----------



## moXJO (8 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> I'm no fan of Labor (Rumpole will attest to that), nor the LNP, but I'm not convinced we would have weathered the fallout without the massive pump priming. That is not to say there weren't programs that I disapprove of, but it's fairly obvious the monies are still washing through the system if investment has been going backwards, but the gdp growth has only just started to slow down.
> 
> We don't have a manufacturing industry to buffer us and essentially we are a services based economy, which means we don't have any inertia to carry us through large dips and peaks. Howard had already sold off the farm to make a large deposit into the public service super so we couldn't mortgage that.
> 
> Anyone who think ~$20b would have solved our problems is naive......




NZ didn't cash splurge and faired better then we did. All Labor did was cash splurge on mates. 
It was too much at once. Probably the greatest waste of money in Australian history.


----------



## moXJO (8 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Which is why is pretty pointless just cutting business taxes. If the consumers aren't spending, business doesn't make money.
> 
> Better to cut low and middle income taxes and get people spending which is going to increase business profits and increase tax receipts from GST and business tax.
> 
> Consumers run the economy and they are not spending right now because as you pointed out government charges and taxes are rising which eats away at discretionary spending ability.




I agree. 
To late for business tax cuts. People don't have the money to spend and are getting squeezed further. Full time jobs are gone, job security gone, add to this rising costs and our future is already written.


----------



## noco (8 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Businesses are more likely to "invest" in labour eliminating technology than jobs. Even the governments optimistic outlooks predict only a 1% increase in GDP in 20 years from it's planned business tax cuts. Big deal.
> 
> Small and medium businesses employ 70% of the workforce and they are unlikely to go elsewhere.
> 
> ...




I guess 1% is better than none at all.

In this competitive world market, business will invest in countries with a lower tax rate......With the down turn in commodity prices, tax incentives are a must if you want business to invest in Australia...More investment means more jobs.....But we must also have cheap and reliable power......Business will turn away from SA and Victoria with the increase in prices and unreliable supply of electricity.

Trump would not be game to raise personal income tax...that is a furphy.

Your mentor Paul Keating lowered the corporate tax rate from 49% to 32.5%......Chris Bowen also believes in a lower tax rate to encourage investment.

You still do not understand how business works.......You still have not answered my question from a previous post about your work experience.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-... those relied on by the Gillard government. 
[/B]


----------



## SirRumpole (9 December 2016)

We now have a full fledged climate sceptic government that ignores the advice of it's hand picked Chief Scientist when it comes to the best way to lower power prices AND lower emissions.



> *Australia won't meet Paris climate change targets, urgent policy needed on emission reduction: Finkel report*
> 
> A leaked report into the country's electricity market says Australia is not on track to meet the Paris climate change commitments and that investment in the sector has stalled because there is no long-term Government policy to reduce carbon emissions.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tisme (9 December 2016)

When State Premiers start setting the agenda and timetable for national activities to fill good policy vacuums at a Federal level ............................


----------



## Tisme (12 December 2016)

If 36% of large companies don't pay any tax, how is lowering the tax rate going to help them?

Maybe we could give them a subsidy to make them competitive on the world stage and provide jobs and growth in, say, India?


----------



## SirRumpole (12 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> If 36% of large companies don't pay any tax, how is lowering the tax rate going to help them?
> 
> Maybe we could give them a subsidy to make them competitive on the world stage and provide jobs and growth in, say, India?




I think we need another way to tax business. Something that they can't avoid or pass on to their customers. 

Cutting down on rorts would help, like ridiculous interest rates on "internal company loans" .


----------



## noco (12 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> We now have a full fledged climate sceptic government that ignores the advice of it's hand picked Chief Scientist when it comes to the best way to lower power prices AND lower emissions.




There is little doubt when Lenore Taylor, a well known left wing socialist and chief Editor of the Guardian Newspaper becomes involved and comes to the rescue of Tristan Edis and the debacle in South Australia,one  gets the impression of a Green taint in the air...There is a similar taste with Alan Finkel.

Much of what has been reported has been grossly exaggerated as we found out about the reporting on the  Great Barrier Reef....We get a report from an ex CEO of GRMPA about how the Reef will never recover and then we get a counter report from the present CEO stating it was all a 10 fold exaggeration.....Why can't these so called scientist tell us the truth....They get found out eventually.

https://www.theguardian.com/sustain...ork-out-what-caused-south-australias-blackout


----------



## sptrawler (12 December 2016)

I wonder how long it will be, before Turnbull gets flipped?


----------



## noco (12 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I wonder how long it will be, before Turnbull gets flipped?




The sooner the better IMHO.


----------



## sptrawler (12 December 2016)

noco said:


> The sooner the better IMHO.




Agree 100%, it was dumb to replace Abbott, there was a reason Turnbull was removed before and nothing has changed.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Agree 100%, it was dumb to replace Abbott, there was a reason Turnbull was removed before and nothing has changed.




There was a reason Abbott was removed too. Something about popularity ratings I think.


----------



## sptrawler (12 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> There was a reason Abbott was removed too. Something about popularity ratings I think.




That's what thee media said about Trump, see how that went, the silent majority would prefer to have a choice.

Currently we have two wishy washy leaders, that offer nothing other than more of the same, the masses aren't happy.


----------



## noco (12 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> That's what thee media said about Trump, see how that went, the silent majority would prefer to have a choice.
> 
> Currently we have two wishy washy leaders, that offer nothing other than more of the same, the masses aren't happy.




I can't recall in my life time such an unruly Government and Opposition...Both have got this country in a mess with very little improvement in site....Something will have to give on both sides in the National interest of this great country.

Perhaps a change of leadership on both sides.....Perhaps a new party who are prepared to take a strong stand.


----------



## luutzu (12 December 2016)

noco said:


> I can't recall in my life time such an unruly Government and Opposition...Both have got this country in a mess with very little improvement in site....Something will have to give on both sides in the National interest of this great country.
> 
> Perhaps a change of leadership on both sides.....Perhaps a new party who are prepared to take a strong stand.




Hanson and One Nation, perhaps?


----------



## McLovin (12 December 2016)

luutzu said:


> Hanson and One Nation, perhaps?




God help us. Look at the ratbags and half-wits she's surrounded herself with this time around. One is a sovereign citizen, the other one doesn't believe the courts have authority because the GG is paid in dollars not pounds.

Both parties need to stop giving so much air time to fringe issues and focus on things like the fact wages aren't rising.


----------



## Tisme (12 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I wonder how long it will be, before Turnbull gets flipped?





That depends on the quality of succession and whether the Labor Party want to keep him there.

The Liberal Party has a large stubborn group of jingoists who won't see reason, won't see compromise, won't negotiate, won't get with the program of governing a nation with good governance. They are too busy trying to outdo each other as the party's penultimate party faithful above all else.

Any lesson the voters sent has been lost on this glib crowd of average talent.

My frustration is that none of them seem capable of putting up anything erudite, anything leading edge, anything nationalistic anything that suggests we are going somewhere with anything .... perhaps they are worried they will get the same hammering the School Halls, Pink Batts and NBN got from within there own ranks.... set the bar too low perhaps?


----------



## SirRumpole (12 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> That depends on the quality of succession and whether the Labor Party want to keep him there.
> 
> The Liberal Party has a large stubborn group of jingoists who won't see reason, won't see compromise, won't negotiate, won't get with the program of governing a nation with good governance. They are too busy trying to outdo each other as the party's penultimate party faithful above all else.
> 
> ...





Intellectual paralysis are the words I would use.

At least Labor is putting out some policies, whatever you may think of them, but those policies are pretty timid too.

No one seems to have come up with a counter to transfer pricing and intra company loans that let multi nationals avoid billions in tax. How hard is it to disallow interest payments on loans within a business where the interest rate is much higher than than the current cash rate ?

Labor also seems paralysed by it's last mining tax fiasco. They had the principle of a RRT right, but they had the wrong design. They should show some courage and revitalise a mining tax.


----------



## Tisme (12 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Intellectual paralysis are the words I would use.
> 
> At least Labor is putting out some policies, whatever you may think of them, but those policies are pretty timid too.
> 
> ...





They should find a man who kicks in obstacles and leads for the whole of us regardless of how stupid people are for voting Labor, Liberal or Greens. Someone the opposition individuals would be proud to be singled out for a verbal hiding as a badge of worthwhile .... a fricken Paul fricken Keating ... someone we can all love to hate and hate to love, but feel inspired to journey down the road with him for reward. Costello et al enjoyed being lectured by Paul, it made them household names.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 December 2016)

More Party trouble for Turnbull

Liberal revolt brews against Malcolm Turnbull over republican speech

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-...evolt-over-republican-movement-speech/8113578


----------



## qldfrog (12 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> They should find a man who kicks in obstacles and leads for the whole of us regardless of how stupid people are for voting Labor, Liberal or Greens. Someone the opposition individuals would be proud to be singled out for a verbal hiding as a badge of worthwhile .... a fricken Paul fricken Keating ... someone we can all love to hate and hate to love, but feel inspired to journey down the road with him for reward. Costello et al enjoyed being lectured by Paul, it made them household names.



With the NZ results for all to see, it is not rocket science, just do as they do, 33% max tax rate, wipe out half of tax law as a result  as you make max tax rate the company rate broaden GST, 
Make sure everyone pay taxes, give pensions to everyone et voila
but labour will cry what poor and paying taxes, middle class will cry: why do I have to pay tax on my super, and the super riches will have no more access to the family trust and super rort..
No chance; this country does not need new politicians, it needs voting majority with  some backbone/spine and stopping entitlement as a way of life be it welfare or grant/tax discount for corporate
; but when voting is mandatory no chance, ever!!!
Killed by democrassy pun intended.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 December 2016)

qldfrog said:


> With the NZ results for all to see, it is not rocket science, just do as they do, 33% max tax rate, wipe out half of tax law as a result  as you make max tax rate the company rate broaden GST,
> Make sure everyone pay taxes, give pensions to everyone et voila
> but labour will cry what poor and paying taxes, middle class will cry: why do I have to pay tax on my super, and the super riches will have no more access to the family trust and super rort..
> No chance; this country does not need new politicians, it needs voting majority with  some backbone/spine and stopping entitlement as a way of life be it welfare or grant/tax discount for corporate
> ...




Key is lucky he doesn't have a Senate to deal with otherwise he wouldn't have got anywhere.


----------



## qldfrog (12 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Key is lucky he doesn't have a Senate to deal with otherwise he wouldn't have got anywhere.




so kill by democracy this time???


----------



## SirRumpole (13 December 2016)

The recession we're already in ?


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-13/the-recession-we-are-already-in/8113052


----------



## SirRumpole (13 December 2016)

qldfrog said:


> so kill by democracy this time???




We want things both ways don't we ? The protection of the Senate and leadership in the Reps. Maybe there is a way of having both, like limiting the number of times the Senate can reject legislation.'


----------



## Tisme (13 December 2016)

You know things aren't going well when the Liberal Party start talking about freedom of expression, democracy and conscious votes in the party room. If ever there was a membership who are tied to the yardarm for dogma vacillation, it's the Libs.


----------



## noco (13 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> The recession we're already in ?
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-13/the-recession-we-are-already-in/8113052




Maybe it is the recession we had to have and no money in the kitty to get us out of trouble.....AHLA Paul Keating.


----------



## McLovin (13 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> We want things both ways don't we ? The protection of the Senate and leadership in the Reps. Maybe there is a way of having both, like limiting the number of times the Senate can reject legislation.'




There is less than zero chance of changing the Senate. The smaller states love their overrepresentation in that house and the leverage it gives them. Couple that with the history of referenda success and it's not even worth discussing.

Why did we ever create such a powerful upper house?


----------



## noco (13 December 2016)

McLovin said:


> There is less than zero chance of changing the Senate. The smaller states love their overrepresentation in that house and the leverage it gives them. Couple that with the history of referenda success and it's not even worth discussing.
> 
> Why did we ever create such a powerful upper house?




It was supposed to keep the ba$tard$ in the lower house honest but now it is being used as a political tool to discredit rather than consider sensible legislation to fix the economic mess we find ourselves in......So long as one side makes the other side look like bad economic managers that is the game and to hell with the national interest.

It is all about power.


----------



## McLovin (13 December 2016)

noco said:


> It was supposed to keep the ba$tard$ in the lower house honest but now it is being used as a political tool to discredit rather than consider sensible legislation to fix the economic mess we find ourselves in......So long as one side makes the other side look like bad economic managers that is the game and to hell with the national interest.
> 
> It is all about power.




Yeah it was supposed to be above party politics and about state rights, but that lasted about one election. I haven't really ever read up on it, but it seems like they wanted something like the House of Lords, but elected and representative of the states like the US Senate. 

I reckon a sensible first step would be to remove the nexus between the house and the senate. We have a senate that is 3/4 the size of the US senate with 1/15th the population.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 December 2016)

McLovin said:


> I reckon a sensible first step would be to remove the nexus between the house and the senate. We have a senate that is 3/4 the size of the US senate with 1/15th the population.




But as you say, there is zero chance of changing the Senate, so it's not even worth discussing.


----------



## McLovin (13 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> But as you say, there is zero chance of changing the Senate, so it's not even worth discussing.




True that. Could you imagine the Senate voting for it, before it even got to a national vote.

Maybe Victoria and New South Wales should just say they want to secede. That'll get some change in the Senate. 

I thought giving taxing powers back to the states wasn't a bad idea.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 December 2016)

McLovin said:


> I thought giving taxing powers back to the states wasn't a bad idea.




Australia has about half the population of California , yet we apparently need 6 state governments, 2 territory governments plus a multiplicity of councils to service us.

 Rather than giving powers back to the States, we should be getting rid of the States, or at least encouraging them to merge to reduce the cost of government.

Does SA really need it's own government ? Populatation 1.7 million. Sydney's is 4 million + . The ACT 350,000 . Tasmania 500,000. A few councils to administer Federal legislation and we would get uniform laws across the country at greatly reduced cost.


----------



## McLovin (13 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Rather than giving powers back to the States, we should be getting rid of the States, or at least encouraging them to merge to reduce the cost of government.




I disagree. If we went down that road we'd end up with Sydney, Melbourne and maybe SE Queensland and everywhere else. We'd end up like the UK; a hugely disproportionate share of government and private sector investment is spent on London and the south east and the rest of the country is dependent on welfare payments and minimum wage jobs. Compare that to federal Germany and how the riches there are spread out (Stuttgart, Munich, Hanover, Berlin, Frankfurt, Hamburg...). 

So I do think there is a place for state governments. It's not about passing legislation, it's about how investment is directed.

That's not to say the system doesn't need a bit of tinkering, which is why I'm all for states being able to broaden their tax base. I bet if South Australia had had to pay for it, Royal Adelaide Hospital wouldn't be the third most expensive building ever built.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 December 2016)

McLovin said:


> I disagree. If we went down that road we'd end up with Sydney, Melbourne and maybe SE Queensland and everywhere else. We'd end up like the UK; a hugely disproportionate share of government and private sector investment is spent on London and the south east and the rest of the country is dependent on welfare payments and minimum wage jobs. Compare that to federal Germany and how the riches there are spread out (Stuttgart, Munich, Hanover, Berlin, Frankfurt, Hamburg...).
> 
> So I do think there is a place for state governments. It's not about passing legislation, it's about how investment is directed.
> 
> That's not to say the system doesn't need a bit of tinkering, which is why I'm all for states being able to broaden their tax base. I bet if South Australia had had to pay for it, Royal Adelaide Hospital wouldn't be the third most expensive building ever built.




We've already got Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and everywhere else.

Living in regional NSW, there has been a lack of infrastructure here for decades. The money always goes where the population and votes are regardless of the system of government.


----------



## sptrawler (13 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> We've already got Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and everywhere else.
> 
> Living in regional NSW, there has been a lack of infrastructure here for decades. The money always goes where the population and votes are regardless of the system of government.




The same happened in W.A until royalties for regions. But now there are no royalties, I guess it will fall over.

http://www.drd.wa.gov.au/rfr/whatisrfr/Pages/default.aspx

Brendan Grylls from the National Party brought it in, he copped a lot of flack at the time, but it has proven great for regional W.A

He now is fundamental in calling for a mining tax per ton of ore removed, which to the common man, makes a lot of sense.
The mining companies aren't happy, wow shock horror, they can sell the resource to China at cost, therefore making no money.
But they can't pay a tax per ton that's weird, it just means the bottom line they can sell it for moves up a notch. 
When the extraction costs are the lowest in the World, it is a stupid argument, our governments are stupid.
Development at all cost is great, until you have nothing to develop, then the mining companies say goodbye.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> The same happened in W.A until royalties for regions. But now there are no royalties, I guess it will fall over.
> 
> http://www.drd.wa.gov.au/rfr/whatisrfr/Pages/default.aspx
> 
> ...




I agree. Howard blew the last mining boom on middle class welfare. Swan tried to bring in a mining tax. The LNP opposed it. More waste of a valuable resource. When will they ever learn ?


----------



## Tisme (14 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I agree. Howard blew the last mining boom on middle class welfare. Swan tried to bring in a mining tax. *The LNP opposed it.* More waste of a valuable resource. When will they ever learn ?




Did they!!! I thought that was Bill Shorten's fault.

What other things did the LNP oppose and denigrate during their time in opposition....surely nothing more than that?

Thank goodness we now have the LNP in power. Things will get back on track real quick and we will see fiscal maturity and strong leadership for sure.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> Did they!!! I thought that was Bill Shorten's fault.
> 
> What other things did the LNP oppose and denigrate during their time in opposition....surely nothing more than that?
> 
> Thank goodness we now have the LNP in power. Things will get back on track real quick and we will see fiscal maturity and strong leadership for sure.






You're right , Swan's mining tax was wrong because it was Labor's idea.

According to the LNP :-

Labor mining tax bad

Liberal  extra payments to see the doctor good.


----------



## Tisme (14 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You're right , Swan's mining tax was wrong because it was Labor's idea.
> 
> According to the LNP :-
> 
> ...




Phew, thank Christmas for that!! 

For a moment there my faith in the LNP was shattered... they are the bastions of truth, justice and the strayan way you know. I'm sure I'm talking to the converted here Rumpole, but don't you just feel someone has wrapped you in a snug blanket on a cold day when you dream , as often I do, of the fellowship and goodwill that exudes day after day from LNP ...... and their soldiers in parliament looking after our great nation.....sigh I feel invigorated and CAN DO!!!!


----------



## SirRumpole (14 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> Phew, thank Christmas for that!!
> 
> For a moment there my faith in the LNP was shattered... they are the bastions of truth, justice and the strayan way you know. I'm sure I'm talking to the converted here Rumpole, but don't you just feel someone has wrapped you in a snug blanket on a cold day when you dream , as often I do, of the fellowship and goodwill that exudes day after day from LNP ...... and their soldiers in parliament looking after our great nation.....sigh I feel invigorated and CAN DO!!!!




Yep, it gives me such a warm feeling inside, like wetting one's pants.


----------



## Tisme (14 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yep, it gives me such a warm feeling inside, like wetting one's pants.




You excited tooo!!!


----------



## sptrawler (14 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> You're right , Swan's mining tax was wrong because it was Labor's idea.




No Swans mining tax was wrong because it wasn't a tax on the resource, it was a tax on profits, which was dumb.

As with most of their policy, it was ill conceived, poorly thought out and appallingly implemented.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> No Swans mining tax was wrong because it wasn't a tax on the resource, it was a tax on profits, which was dumb.
> 
> As with most of their policy, it was ill conceived, poorly thought out and appallingly implemented.




Has the LNP proposed a tax on the resource ?

They didn't attack Swan's tax for "doing it the wrong way", they attacked it per se as an assault on capitalism and for allegedly drying up investment.


----------



## noco (14 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Has the LNP proposed a tax on the resource ?
> 
> They didn't attack Swan's tax for "doing it the wrong way", they attacked it per se as an assault on capitalism and for allegedly drying up investment.




The gooses mining tax cost more to administer than monies received.

The gooses mining tax was supposed finance NDIS and Gonski.....Labor left both unfunded and the Libs had to pick up the tab.

Just another Labor stuff up.


----------



## sptrawler (14 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Has the LNP proposed a tax on the resource ?
> 
> They didn't attack Swan's tax for "doing it the wrong way", they attacked it per se as an assault on capitalism and for allegedly drying up investment.




i don't personally care what the LNP did or didn't do, they are proving to be no better than Labor were.
Our politics are in an appalling state, both major parties are a disgrace IMO, they all stand for nothing but personal gain from what I can see.

The only way for Australia to get fair compensation for our resources, is to tax them on a volume basis.IMO

The only person in Australian politics pushing that is W.A's Brendan Grylls, and instead of supporting him all of our politicians are backing away from the issue.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-13/brendon-grylls-fighting-two-front-war-on-mining-tax/8117518

Our resources should be bench marked against the rest of the World, to determine the extraction/shipping cost and if appropriate a tax applied, which still maintains competitiveness.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> i don't personally care what the LNP did or didn't do, they are proving to be no better than Labor were.
> Our politics are in an appalling state, both major parties are a disgrace IMO, they all stand for nothing but personal gain from what I can see.
> 
> The only way for Australia to get fair compensation for our resources, is to tax them on a volume basis.IMO
> ...




Hang on to your hat, I agree, except maybe the tax should be as a percentage of the current price, not on volume. 

That allows for price fluctuations and means government revenue is proportional to company revenue.


----------



## sptrawler (14 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Hang on to your hat, I agree, except maybe the tax should be as a percentage of the current price, not on volume.
> 
> That allows for price fluctuations and means government revenue is proportional to company revenue.




I disagree, prices can be manipulated, same as profits.
Our resources are one of the cheapest to extract in the World, which is why overseas miners were annoyed when BHP and RIO were selling ore at ridiculously low prices.
BHP and Rio say their Iron ore recovery cost is around $20/ton, which means they still make a profit when the price fell to $30/ton. If a $5 or even a $3/ ton tax was applied, that would be passed on to the buyer. They still need iron ore and ours would still be the cheapest.

When the resource has been stripped, do you think the mining companies will stay around to pay our welfare?

Australia hasn't got the population, or tax base, to be able to generate enough money to develop our economy. The only way we can get the money, is to sell everything to China, because they have the money to develop our infrastructure.

The only other way, is to make more money from what we sell and develop our own infrastructure. The only option we have is to tax the resources removed, we only have one shot at this.IMO.


----------



## sptrawler (14 December 2016)

I see Abbott is telling it as it is, he will cop the wrath of the media and the Labor Party, again.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...acks-a-bit-of-depression-20161214-gtasat.html


"We have to wake up to ourselves," Mr Abbott told Sydney radio station 2GB.

"This idea that you can be unemployed on benefits in a town where you can't get fruit pickers...it's just wrong."

"​If people are doing the best they can for themselves and for their families and it is literally impossible for them to find work, fair enough. [But] we were far too ready to put people on the DSP [disability support pension], with bad backs, a bit of depression and so on. These are not permanent conditions."


----------



## Tisme (14 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I see Abbott is telling it as it is, he will cop the wrath of the media and the Labor Party, again.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...acks-a-bit-of-depression-20161214-gtasat.html
> 
> ...




I don't think many would argue with his logic, if so maybe only by degrees.


----------



## sptrawler (14 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> I don't think many would argue with his logic, if so maybe only by degrees.




It would be nice, if your statement was true, but it was this logic that had him replaced by Turnbull.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> I don't think many would argue with his logic, if so maybe only by degrees.




Refuse a job (within 50 km) -> off the dole for 6 months.

Quit a job without valid excuse -> ditto.


----------



## Tisme (14 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> It would be nice, if your statement was true, but it was this logic that had him replaced by Turnbull.




I think he was given the bump for other reasons: 1) his peers were fed up with Credlin 2) the public weren't seeing any fruition of promises (as absurd as they were) 3) the press had wrung out every ounce of favours and the govt was still heading south as a cogent policy and outcomes unit.


----------



## sptrawler (14 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Refuse a job (within 50 km) -> off the dole for 6 months.
> 
> Quit a job without valid excuse -> ditto.




Again as I said above, Abbott was saying these things when he was prime minister, everyone shouted him down and he was subsequently replaced.

Now that the $hit is really hitting the fan, everyone wants strong sensible leadership, because people are realising their ar$es are in a sling.

Well best of luck.


----------



## sptrawler (14 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> I think he was given the bump for other reasons: 1) his peers were fed up with Credlin 2) the public weren't seeing any fruition of promises (as absurd as they were) 3) the press had wrung out every ounce of favours and the govt was still heading south as a cogent policy and outcomes unit.




He was the only alternative, to more of the same, now with Turnbull and Shorten we get more of the same.

Whether people realise it or not, we are at the crossroads, unless we create new ways of increasing the tax reciepts, we will have to allow more foreign ownership to supply capital for infrastructure.

It isn't rocket science, we have a first world living standard, with a third World resources based economy.:1zhelp:

Abbott was given the bump, because the left wing press hated him, simple.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Again as I said above, Abbott was saying these things when he was prime minister, everyone shouted him down and he was subsequently replaced.




He was saying other things as well, like waiting 6 months for the dole regardless of whether someone could find a job or not. That's basically unfair and there is a difference between that and refusing a job offer.



> Abbott was given the bump, because the left wing press hated him, simple.




Are you calling Nikki Savva "Left Wing" ?


----------



## sptrawler (14 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> He was saying other things as well, like waiting 6 months for the dole regardless of whether someone could find a job or not. That's basically unfair and there is a difference between that and refusing a job offer.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you calling Nikki Savva "Left Wing" ?




Well lets put it this way, I have a son who has a trade and is middle aged, he doesn't want a job.

I want the Government, to tell him, there is a job here, we will pay for you to get there and if you don't take it you get sod all.

He is lazy, he won't listen, and he can live o.k with his mates.

Well I don't think that really helps our Country.

By the way, he tells me to just chill out a bit more, maybe it's me.lol

Also I don't know who Nikki Savva is, never heard of her.


----------



## Tisme (14 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> Abbott was given the bump, because the left wing press hated him, simple.




This clipping suggests it was disobeying Murdoch that forced the public, peer and press calls for his head:


https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/when-tony-abbott-crossed-the-line,7334


----------



## SirRumpole (14 December 2016)

I had my doubts about Morrison's abilities as Treasurer, and finance experts agree.

Scott Morrison's household debt remarks labelled 'inane and stupid' by finance experts


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-14/morrison-debt-remarks-inane-stupid/8121086




> Several finance experts have been scathing about Scott Morrison's comments today on large amounts of household debt.
> Key points:
> 
> Scott Morrison says Australians should take comfort that rising asset prices are offsetting big debts
> ...


----------



## sptrawler (14 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I had my doubts about Morrison's abilities as Treasurer, and finance experts agree.
> 
> Scott Morrison's household debt remarks labelled 'inane and stupid' by finance experts
> 
> ...




I have to agree, maybe Morrison is better as an ideas man rather than a facts and figures man, I certainly thought his comments were stupid or misrepresented. 

Everyone with excess debt, should be using the low interest rates, to pay it down.IMO


----------



## sptrawler (14 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> This clipping suggests it was disobeying Murdoch that forced the public, peer and press calls for his head:
> 
> 
> https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/when-tony-abbott-crossed-the-line,7334




Well that is a mute point, the reality remains, you have the leaders you deserve.


----------



## noco (15 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> I had my doubts about Morrison's abilities as Treasurer, and finance experts agree.
> 
> Scott Morrison's household debt remarks labelled 'inane and stupid' by finance experts
> 
> ...




What else would expect from the left wing socialist ABC?

What did they say about Chris Bowen the opposition shadow treasurer?......No plan to fix the economy...no new ideas ......all whishy whashy rhetoric coming out of his mouth.


----------



## noco (15 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I have to agree, maybe Morrison is better as an ideas man rather than a facts and figures man, I certainly thought his comments were stupid or misrepresented.
> 
> Everyone with excess debt, should be using the low interest rates, to pay it down.IMO




We are paying a $billion a week in interest alone on Labor's bad management 2007/2013 and they still have to borrow $100,000,000 a day to pay for the welfare of the 90% of the 50,000 illegal boat people let in by that stupid Rudd/Gillard/Rudd....Not to mention of course all the 36,000 dole bludgers.

We are having to pay for Labor's unfunded NDIS and Gonski...That funding was supposed to come from the Goose's MRT but it never happened.

Morrison does not have to figures man according Labor as Treasury does all that work for them.


----------



## sptrawler (15 December 2016)

noco said:


> We are paying a $billion a week in interest alone on Labor's bad management 2007/2013 and they still have to borrow $100,000,000 a day to pay for the welfare of the 90% of the 50,000 illegal boat people let in by that stupid Rudd/Gillard/Rudd....Not to mention of course all the 36,000 dole bludgers.
> 
> We are having to pay for Labor's unfunded NDIS and Gonski...That funding was supposed to come from the Goose's MRT but it never happened.
> 
> Morrison does not have to figures man according Labor as Treasury does all that work for them.




He still shouldn't say, that an increase in house value, condones an increase in borrowing.

That is a treasurer supporting a ponzi scheme.IMO

I may have misunderstood the reporting and he may have been miss reported, if so I stand corrected.
But that is how it came across.

It is starting to look like the Country is running out of ammo.IMO

Maybe they should sell off W.A to the Chinese for a zillion dollars, relocate the sandgropers over East and Bob's your uncle.lol


----------



## pixel (15 December 2016)

noco said:


> We are paying a $billion a week in interest alone on Labor's bad management 2007/2013 and they still have to borrow $100,000,000 a day to pay for the welfare of the 90% of the 50,000 illegal boat people let in by that stupid Rudd/Gillard/Rudd....Not to mention of course all the 36,000 dole bludgers.
> 
> We are having to pay for Labor's unfunded NDIS and Gonski...That funding was supposed to come from the Goose's MRT but it never happened.
> 
> Morrison does not have to figures man according Labor as Treasury does all that work for them.




noco,

Let's make allowance that it's been a few years since you learned the 3 R's. But if 86,000 "illegals and dole-bludgers" receive $100 Million a day, I think I'll give up trading for a living and become one of them myself. Divide one by the other and you get $1,162.79 per person and day.  I don't know about you, but on average, that's more than I make trading the ASX.

That aside, you also conveniently omit that Labor had to deal with the GFC, which they did so successfully that Australia maintained AAA credit rating, beating even the USofA at the time. And all that from a standing start, because the previous mob had squandered the fruits of a decade-long boom by creating a massive expectation of middle-class welfare - attempts to buy votes with unfettered bribes. 

Finally: Take the time to read and understand the article that Tisme provided the link to:


> Until now if anybody asked who was the worst prime minister Australia ever had, most would say Billy McMahon.
> 
> Now Abbott's name will appear in Australia's history as the leader who could not lead; a man who is untrustworthy, unreliable and dishonest; who shamed himself and the country he should never have been allowed to lead because he was totally unqualified by birth and by incompetence.
> 
> ...



Amen to that.


----------



## boofhead (15 December 2016)

There seems to be a little bit of ignorance in this thread about how some aspects of welfare in Australia work. Newstart recipients are required to participate in negotiated activities. Failure to do so can result in suspended payments. Howard privatised much of the system. Centrelink has minimal involvement now even though they pay the recipient the welfare payment. The agencies that get assigned the unemployed handle most of the reporting. People do get payment suspensions. Where is the Newstart payment % of population highest? Suburbs with low socio-economic backgrounds and regional/rural areas which have higher unemployment.

Centrelink will find it difficult to suspend payments if they're unaware of someone turning down work without suitable justification. Centrelink has no idea where you are applying, if you have an interview, if you have a job offer etc.

Now on to the non-government agencies that do the bulk of the face to face handling of the unemployed - many are income earners for their owning organisation. ABC's 4Corners program last year or so had a bit of coverage of some of the crap they get involved with. It is more about bureaucratic paperwork than doing something in the best interest of the job seeker. I spent some time in the past and know plenty that have been clients of the system. Far too many of the case handlers have a chip on their shoulder and more interested in their KPIs with minimal effort. A cousin worked in one for a little while. What she learned is the system ruins people that rely on it for more than a few months. A small number will put in the extra yards to understand the person and do things to help them get in to work.

Many of the organisations will prefer to do internal training - they will get government funding to do so. It will be all prepared stuff which is reused month after month.

The agencies have two types of preferred client. One that is on their books for a few weeks and finds a job which they can claim credit for to get some government money. The other is the client that will have many identifiable issues and long term unemployed so they can get extra money. If you're inbetween you're too much effort without a dollar carrot for them.


----------



## moXJO (15 December 2016)

pixel said:


> noco,
> 
> Let's make allowance that it's been a few years since you learned the 3 R's. But if 86,000 "illegals and dole-bludgers" receive $100 Million a day, I think I'll give up trading for a living and become one of them myself. Divide one by the other and you get $1,162.79 per person and day.  I don't know about you, but on average, that's more than I make trading the ASX.
> 
> ...




What a crock of ****e.
Labor sunk us through overspending in the wrong areas. Libs failed to pass tough measures. Hockey was right to warn of trouble


----------



## Tisme (15 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> It is starting to look like the Country is running out of ammo.IMO




It does sound desperate. For a treasurer of a party that is vehemently opposed to deficits, the "good debt" versus "bad debt" sounds ominous.

However having said that, Howard didn't seem to acknowledge that selling off the farm to pay down debt, is not the same as the farm making a profit to pay down debt, but the public seemed happy that 1.3% of GDP ~$20bn was sitting in treasury vaults rather than remaining in a performing asset portoflio.  Peter got robbed by Paul who was then robbed by Rudd.

Triple A Morrison needs to shut his mouth for once. Even his 2GB mates Hadley and Jones won't be able to save him if he continues to come up with simpletonomics.


----------



## sptrawler (15 December 2016)

pixel said:


> noco,
> 
> Let's make allowance that it's been a few years since you learned the 3 R's. But if 86,000 "illegals and dole-bludgers" receive $100 Million a day, I think I'll give up trading for a living and become one of them myself. Divide one by the other and you get $1,162.79 per person and day.  I don't know about you, but on average, that's more than I make trading the ASX.
> 
> ...




I guess it depends where you source your opinion from, pixel.

_Did spending “save” Australia?

Firstly, this was a financial crisis. In the US and Britain, financial institutions were collapsing. It was not the case in Australia. No bank made a loss for one quarter. We had a well regulated prudential system with a dedicated regulator. The government was able to guarantee banks on wholesale borrowing markets when it was needed because it had a AAA credit rating to back it.

If the banks had been unable to continue credit lines for companies, that would have affected the real economy. But they could, and did. Government spending put more money into household budgets, but there is no evidence they spent it. In fact quite the reverse. The real stimulus to the Australian economy came from soaring terms of trade – or the China effect.

Even at the trough of the downturn, Australia’s commodity prices were still higher than they had been at any time before 2007. And they surged and peaked at all-time records in 2010 just about the time that the killing season got into full swing. Of the era, the part I like best is the Treasury explanation of the benefits of the stimulus in the 2009 Budget. It showed that without “temporary” stimulus, unemployment would peak in 2010 at 10 per cent, but with it the outcome would only be 8.5 per cent. In 2010 unemployment turned out to be 5.25%

In other words, Treasury completely overestimated the effect of the crisis then completely overestimated the response required to deal with it. Spending didn’t make the difference. What really mattered was we had a strong and well-run financial system. And far from following the US into a downturn, we were following China in a boom.

Don’t expect to hear that from Rudd or Gillard or the various Treasury officials on tonight’s program. There was one thing Rudd and Gillard always agreed on. Whether it was Pink Batts or school halls, pensions, Gonski education funding or parental leave, they always agreed on more spending. The real killing season was on the taxpayer._

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...d/news-story/86d7af0e1f3cdb8ee1837b60b6e4e7d4


----------



## SirRumpole (15 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> _Did spending “save” Australia?
> 
> _



_

Are they your own words ? If not kindly quote your source._


----------



## Knobby22 (15 December 2016)

Spending did save our economy. The company I worked for was a case in point as we avoided having to lay off staff due the money spent on schools. A lot of our regular work dried up. Once unemployment starts rising and fear takes hold all bets are off and the economy goes into recession leading to loss of more jobs. This is how it works and is proven. It's easy for some to say everything would have been OK if we had done nothing but I have no doubt that this is a fallacy.

I do think though the second handout by Rudd was not required and if he had of been more prudent we would be in a better position now. And of course the ceiling batts rollout was completely mishandled.


----------



## sptrawler (15 December 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Spending did save our economy. The company I worked for was a case in point as we avoided having to lay off staff due the money spent on schools. A lot of our regular work dried up. Once unemployment starts rising and fear takes hold all bets are off and the economy goes into recession leading to loss of more jobs. This is how it works and is proven. It's easy for some to say everything would have been OK if we had done nothing but I have no doubt that this is a fallacy.
> 
> I do think though the second handout by Rudd was not required and if he had of been more prudent we would be in a better position now. And of course the ceiling batts rollout was completely mishandled.




I have no doubt you are correct, but if it was as easy and simple as people try to make it out, a similar handout would remedy the issues we have currently.

The underlying strengh of our economy at the time, and the massive resources boom that took hold from 2008-2014, kept our economy bubbling along, we had to import workers to cover the shortfall.

What is the difference between now and 2009? The resources boom has fallen off a cliff, if Rudd saved us by throwing money at school halls and pink batts, all we need do is the same.

But I think we all know, that isn't the real issue, the real issue is the money was spent in non productive areas.

Now we find ourselves in a position where we need to spend money on infrastructure, but we don't have any and we are in hock.

If Rudd had spent the money on infrastructure, to improve the nations underlying efficiency instead of pork barreling, we may be in a better position today.

But as I said, it depends whose opinion one wants to listen to, from what I'm hearing, Labor were brilliant for the two terms of office they were in power.

A case in point regarding spending on school halls, it hasn't seemed to have improved our education level.


----------



## Tisme (15 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I guess it depends where you source your opinion from, pixel.
> 
> _Did spending “save” Australia?
> 
> Firstly, _



_

I admit I through the other article in as bait, but you just can't reference the Courier Mail as a reliable source. Even in the blue ribbon seat where I have my big house, the locals are critical of the long drawn bows and blue collar bashing. It's juts not a credible/reliable source to reference...... which is probably why you chose it to contrast the other?_


----------



## Tisme (15 December 2016)

Knobby22 said:


> Spending did save our economy. The company I worked for was a case in point as we avoided having to lay off staff due the money spent on schools. A lot of our regular work dried up. Once unemployment starts rising and fear takes hold all bets are off and the economy goes into recession leading to loss of more jobs. This is how it works and is proven. It's easy for some to say everything would have been OK if we had done nothing but I have no doubt that this is a fallacy.
> 
> I do think though the second handout by Rudd was not required and if he had of been more prudent we would be in a better position now. And of course the ceiling batts rollout was completely mishandled.




Yes it did save many in the commercial construction industry too, but it also bank rolled the uber large building and development companies with high incomes to play project managers who in turn dripped what was left after the consultants and govt syphons to the actual sub contractors and suppliers. It enabled those companies to the international stage, which must be good for GNP...right?


----------



## Tisme (15 December 2016)

Fills my bosom with pride when you look back at our fair go Australia, full of mature opinion leaders who still to this day voice their distaste at the rotten uncouth way Tony and Malcolm are being treated by the leftie press....




https://www.facebook.com/TheLabourCoalition/videos/914530838683499/


----------



## McLovin (15 December 2016)

noco said:


> We are paying a $billion a week in interest alone on Labor's bad management




Gross government debt when Labor left office was around $250b. I guarantee they weren't borrowing at ~20% interest.

Of course we won't mention the GFC. I'm sure if the Libs had been running the show we would have sailed through with surpluses at 5% of GDP.


----------



## Ves (15 December 2016)

McLovin said:


> Of course we won't mention the GFC. I'm sure if the Libs had been running the show we would have sailed through with surpluses at 5% of GDP.



A billion a week in interest?   Geez,  not even Heinz would be able to supply all the sauce added to come up with that figure.


----------



## Tisme (15 December 2016)

McLovin said:


> Gross government debt when Labor left office was around $250b. I guarantee they weren't borrowing at ~20% interest.
> 
> Of course we won't mention the GFC. I'm sure if the Libs had been running the show we would have sailed through with surpluses at 5% of GDP.





Actual figures:



> _*Rudd/Gillard*_
> 
> 
> *Underlying Cash Balance*
> ...







> *Howard*
> 
> *Underlying Cash Balance*
> The main components of the underlying cash balance are cash from operations and cash movements in the
> ...




*Abbott and Turnbull*

as of May 2016:

*Assets and Liabilities*

The net worth of the General Government sector is a negative net asset position of $343,889 million at 31 August 2013. The net debt of the General Government sector is $284,657 million at May 2016.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 December 2016)

We have a government so adverse to increasing revenue that it's threatening our ability to deal with a structural deficit.

MYEFO: Deficit expected to deepen in mid-year budget update

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-19/deficit-expected-to-deepen-in-myefo-report/8130842


----------



## Tisme (19 December 2016)

*Housing Affordability Inquiry*

Waste of time and taxpayer money?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-16/housing-affordability:-no-recommendations-from-inquiry/8127548


----------



## SirRumpole (19 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> *Housing Affordability Inquiry*
> 
> Waste of time and taxpayer money?
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-16/housing-affordability:-no-recommendations-from-inquiry/8127548




Definitely a waste of time and money. Don't mention "negative gearing" boys, even though virtually every decent economist wants it wound back, not to mention State Liberal party people.


----------



## Tisme (19 December 2016)

I see we are about to get the latest news from our natural born economic managers on the state of the economy.

Unlike the ALP govts that jagged a prestigious AAA credit rating by being economic vandals, this govt will show why we deserve to be in the same room as Canada, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland? 

Kind of odd how Australia only got its AAA credit ratings across all three agencies that count in 2011 under Wayne Swan as treasurer. Why is that? 

The only other time Australia managed to gain a ubiquitous AAA rating was under Gough Whitlam.


Of course it's will be voter elected Bill Shorten's fault and let's throw in the people's elected Senate too. It's about time we devolved the voting system to only include pastoralists and wealthy squatters.


Update: 7.45 am Our treasurer has not let us down. He has just announced the budget has saved heaps, $16.5bn of it is what Labor would have spent if they won the last election !!!! Thankfully the xmas gods are on our side .


----------



## Tisme (19 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Definitely a waste of time and money. Don't mention "negative gearing" boys, even though virtually every decent economist wants it wound back, not to mention State Liberal party people.




You do know that blame shifter Scott Morrison was a player in the Property Council of Australia before he became the world's most benign treasurer?


----------



## SirRumpole (19 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> You do know that blame shifter Scott Morrison was a player in the Property Council of Australia before he became the world's most benign treasurer?




That explains a lot, as well as MT's electorate being the most populated with negative gearers in the country.


----------



## SirRumpole (19 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> Update: 7.45 am Our treasurer has not let us down. He has just announced the budget has saved heaps, $16.5bn of it is what Labor would have spent if they won the last election !!!! Thankfully the xmas gods are on our side .




These people are pathetic and really shows the binary nature of our political system. Always talking about Labor. Hey guys, we are going down the sinkhole, but we'd be going down faster if Labor was in.  Well Labor isn't in, but this equally deplorable group are. 

Governments lose elections Scott, just remember that.


----------



## Tisme (20 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> These people are pathetic and really shows the binary nature of our political system. Always talking about Labor. Hey guys, we are going down the sinkhole, but we'd be going down faster if Labor was in.  Well Labor isn't in, but this equally deplorable group are.
> 
> Governments lose elections Scott, just remember that.





He got on the ABC (on LNP's most hated list) last night to explain it was Labor's fault he is out of his depth.

The Libs must hate dragging around the anchor of their own making, when they decided to demonise deficits as reason for morons to elect them. 

If ever there was a reason that economics should be a compulsory subject in year 10, it would be to remove forever the partial paralysis from making a political vote based on commonsense.


----------



## Tisme (20 December 2016)

Whispers abound in the inner circles. Beware the Ides of March


----------



## Tisme (20 December 2016)

I was just thinking how bad the deficit would have been if Malcolm hadn't demonised then ripped off Labor's idea back in May of taxing high end superannuants and increasing tobacco excise.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> I was just thinking how bad the deficit would have been if Malcolm hadn't demonised then ripped off Labor's idea back in May of taxing high end superannuants and increasing tobacco excise.




That must have been a gut wrenching decision for them.


----------



## Tisme (21 December 2016)

This is your dollars at work generated by the company that is one of the LNP's retirement and nursery favourite institutions.... it is an outstanding piece of crap. The art of saying absolutely nothing and getting paid to say it. Meanwhile, somehow, the real knowledge base manages to sidestep the parasites and actually deliver something ... a tactical triumph that shouldn't be necessary.

This is a series of short vids that would be better served if it had canned laughter after every statement.




one wag posted this on another forum, relating it to the LNPs idea of a brave new digital world:


----------



## sptrawler (21 December 2016)

I guess the only thing Malcolm has going for him, is that Bill is his opponent.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...pm-on-all-fronts-but-one-20161220-gteu19.html


----------



## SirRumpole (21 December 2016)

sptrawler said:


> I guess the only thing Malcolm has going for him, is that Bill is his opponent.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...pm-on-all-fronts-but-one-20161220-gteu19.html




Yes, the Bill that won 16 seats from Turnbull  in the election.


----------



## sptrawler (21 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, the Bill that won 16 seats from Turnbull  in the election.




Touche.


----------



## noco (21 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, the Bill that won 16 seats from Turnbull  in the election.




Purely on lies and Socialist propaganda on the MEDISCARE.....And yes it worked.


----------



## noco (22 December 2016)

Malcolm, you won't listen to your Liberal voters...You have been warned......If you don't heed that warning your leadership is doomed.

If you don't regroup your team now, there is a revolution on the way and it is gaining momentum every hour.

Not only will the Liberal Party suffer but there will be repercussions for Labor and the Greens.

Voters are looking for change and some action and if Cory Bernadi and One Nation were to ever form a combined party they would be a force to contend with. 

The following of Cory on Face Book is unbelievable.

2017 will be the year.



*Maryann Manchee
4:05am Dec 22
EWS
OPINION
BUSINESS REVIEW
NATIONAL AFFAIRS
SPORT
LIFE
TECH
ARTS
TRAVEL
HIGHER ED
MEDIA
PROPERTY

NATIONAL AFFAIRS
Cory Bernardi on brink of Liberal Party split

South Australian senator Cory Bernardi.
The Australian12:00AM December 22, 2016
Save
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on email
Share more...
174
SARAH MARTIN
Political reporterCanberra
@msmarto

Fears are mounting within the  ¬Liberal Party that maverick South Australian senator Cory Bernardi is set to split from the Coalition to spearhead the new Australian Conservatives party, with an  ¬announcement expected in the new year.

The conservative firebrand and his “very close friend” Gina  ¬Rinehart met key members of US president-elect Donald Trump’s campaign team, including former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani and campaign manager Kellyanne Conway, in Washington last month, fuelling fears the senator might have the support of Australia’s richest woman to bankroll the party and dilute the Liberals’ support base.

Senator Bernardi is refusing to comment on his plans, but allies and colleagues of the outspoken conservative say a breakaway Trump-inspired movement is  ¬imminent and attempts are being made to convince him to stay within the Liberal Party.

A message on Senator Ber ¬nardi’s Australian Conservatives website posted this week says the group is planning a “massive” 2017, and is set to ramp up its profile in the new year after operating since July with “modest staff numbers and a bare bones website”.

“This is all set to change in 2017,” it says. “Our new state-of-the-art website is almost ready to go, and we will be launching it early next year, along with a number of important campaigns.”

The threat of defection comes amid widespread alarm within the Coalition about the momentum and popularity of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party as voters turn away from the major parties in record numbers.

MORE: PM must watch his back
Senator Bernardi dismissed as “gossip” renewed suggestions that he was poised to quit the Liberal Party, but close allies of the  ¬conservative said his long-time flirtation with the idea of a new conservative party had now  ¬advanced to “active dating”.

“He is becoming more serious about this as people are losing faith in the Liberal Party and as he is losing faith in Malcolm Turnbull,” one senior Liberal said.

Another friend and ally of Senator Bernardi told The Australian that they were “very concerned” that he would quit early in the year and might attempt to lure other parliamentary colleagues to the party.

“I don’t think this is a  ¬flippant thing; this is now serious,” the ally said. “I am worried about it, and I will do everything I can to try to keep him in our tent.”

While refusing to confirm the move yesterday, Senator Bernardi said he would “not comment on gossip or speculation”, in a clear hardening of his position since July when he ruled out defecting and said he wanted to “make the Liberal Party stronger”.

One of his conservative parliamentary colleagues said Senator Bernardi had since “given up on Malcolm” to steer the party to the Right, but said most conservatives still believed the Liberal Party as the party of Menzies was their “natural home”. “However, I think a lot of people would be sorely tempted,” the colleague said.

Another said a new political party under Senator Bernardi would be a force to be reckoned with, particularly if the new  ¬conservative force was financially supported by Mrs Rinehart,  ¬described as a very close friend who shared the senator’s views on conservatism.

The Hancock Prospecting and Roy Hill Holdings chairwoman is also a long-time friend of Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce, to whom she donated $50,000 for his 2013 election campaign when he switched to the lower house.

Mrs Rinehart, who took Senator Bernardi on a private charter flight to the Rio Olympics this year, recently called for the government to adopt the stimulatory policies being promised by Mr Trump, and praised the president-elect’s team for having “listened to the people of America’’.

“In addition to wanting to deliver secure borders, a safer country and less government debt, Trump’s team members advised that the president-elect wants to cut federal government tape by 50 per cent in his first months of office, and that he wants to cut company tax to 15 per cent. What a kickstart to the American economy that will provide!’’ Mrs Rinehart said in a recent speech. “If only we were hearing similar policies from our own government.’’

Senator Bernardi and Mrs Rinehart met Mr Giuliani and Ms Conway last month in Washington, where they were speaking at the Wall Street Journal CEO Council’s dinner. Following the meeting with Ms Conway, Senator Bernardi said on Twitter: “If you want campaign advice, always good to learn from best.”

He also included the hashtag #MakeAustraliaGreatAgain. He is directing his supporters to the Australian Conservatives website, which has signed up more than 50,000 supporters.

Senator Bernardi declined to comment on his intentions for 2017, or on whether he had discussed the new Australian Conservatives movement with Mrs Rinehart.

However, in his final Christmas message for the year, Senator Bernardi thanked his supporters for their “inspiration” and said he was “determined to repay that faitin even greater measure in the new year”.

A spokeswoman for Mrs Rinehart said: “We don’t engage in a running commentary on hypotheticals.”
Bernardi on brink of Libs split

*


----------



## SirRumpole (22 December 2016)

noco said:


> A spokeswoman for Mrs Rinehart said: “We don’t engage in a running commentary on hypotheticals.”
> Bernardi on brink of Libs split
> 
> [/B]




Good stuff, split the Conservative vote and hand government back to "The Left".


----------



## noco (22 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Good stuff, split the Conservative vote and hand government back to "The Left".




I am sure you would like that but I believe the Labor Party and the Greens will also suffer.

I really believe there are a lot of silent back benches on both sides of politics who are just waiting for such an advent to happen. 

Turnbull has swayed too far to the left and Shorten has gone beyond the far left.

2017 could be an exciting year in politics as many people are fed up with this political correctness....the way alternative  energy is getting out of hand.......the way Muslims are being allowed to thumb their noses at our laws and way of life......The way Turnbull is clinging to the Paris agreement ......The way we are borrowing money to give away in foreign aid to the likes of Islamic Indonesia......The amount of social security we are paying to 90% of the 50,000 illegals that Rudd/Gillard/Rudd allowed into the country with open borders 2007/2013....Most of us including Labor people are disgruntled about the absurd amount money paid to ex politicians and Prime Ministers...It really is disgusting to say the least

It is all starting to boil.....So watch the fire works start to unfold.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 December 2016)

noco said:


> and Shorten has gone beyond the far left.




Yu are totally blinkered noco. Shorten is about in the centre imo, maybe even a bit to the Right. He was one of the most moderate union leaders when he was in the ACTU.

Labor now doesn't nearly approach the Whitlam government which was the most Left Wing this country has seen.

They did some good stuff but weren't disciplined enough financially.

Interesting that Whitlam and Fraser became mates after politics. Two great enemies united. There is hope for you and me mate.



Have a Good Festive Season.


----------



## noco (22 December 2016)

SirRumpole said:


> Yu are totally blinkered noco. Shorten is about in the centre imo, maybe even a bit to the Right. He was one of the most moderate union leaders when he was in the ACTU.
> 
> Labor now doesn't nearly approach the Whitlam government which was the most Left Wing this country has seen.
> 
> ...




Is that so Rumpy?

Well now....

Did you know Billy Boy Shorten is a member of the Fabian Society along with most of the other Labor MPs.

Did you know your Billy Boy is a foundation member of GETUP an off shoot of the Labor Party propaganda machine?..

Did you know your Billy Boy was past board member of GETUP. 

The Fabian Society control the Green/Labor left wing socialist coalition and have don so for many years...the late Gough Whitlam was their patron.

http://takebackaustralia.aussieblogs.com.au/2011/01/08/fabian-society-and-the-alp/

The Who’s Who of Fabian society members

*Gough Whitlam,
*Bob Hawke,
*Paul Keating,
*John Cain,
*Jim Cairns,
*Don Dunstan
*Neville Wran,
*Frank Crean
*Anthony Albanese MP, Shadow Minister for Environment &
Heritage, Shadow Minister for Water
* David Bassanese, Journalist, Australian Financial Review
* Caroline Bayliss, Acting Executive Director, Global
Sustainability, RMIT University
* Eric Beecher, CEO, Private Media Partners
* Julian Burnside QC
* The Hon Kim Carr, Shadow Minister for Housing; Urban
Development; Local Government
* Tricia Caswell, CEO, Victorian Association of Forest Industries
* Barry Cohen, former Federal Minister for Arts, Heritage and
Environment
* Greg Combet, Secretary, ACTU
* Simon Crean MP, Shadow Minister for Regional Development
* Professor Glyn Davis, Vice-Chancellor, The University of
Melbourne
* Julian Disney, Professor and Director of Social Justice Project,
Department of Law, University of NSW
* Stephen Duckett, Dean, Faculty of Health Sciences, La Trobe
University
* Senator John Faulkner, former Labor Senate Leader
* Professor John Freebairn, Director of the Melbourne Institute
of Applied Economic and Social Research at the University of
Melbourne
* Dr Joshua Funder, GBS Venture Partners Limited
* Dennis Glover, Associate Fellow, School of Social Sciences, La
Trobe University
* Mike Georgeff, Australia s leading expert on artificial
intelligence and successful Silicon Valley entrepreneur
* Nicholas Gruen, CEO, Lateral Economics
* Julie Hansen, former President of the VLGA
* Tony Harris, former Auditor of NSW
* Ryan Heath, speechwriter and events coordinater for Britain’s
most senior public servant, Gus O’Donnell, the Cabinet Secretary
* Ashley Hogan, Historian, Senator John Faulkner’s Office
* Brian Howe, Professorial Associate, Centre for Public Policy,
The University of Melbourne
* Jim Jupp, Centre for Immigration and Multicultural Studies,
Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National
University
* Bill Kelty, Former ACTU Secretary and Reserve Bank board
member
* John Langmore, Professorial Fellow, Political Science
Department, The University of Melbourne
* Jenny Lewis, Senior Research Fellow, Political Science, The
University of Melbourne
* Ian Lowe AO, President, Australian Conservation Foundation
* Jenny Macklin MP, Deputy Leader of the Opposition
* Robert Manne, Professor of Politics, La Trobe University
* Ian Marsh, Professor of Public Management, Australia & New
Zealand School of Government, University of Sydney
* Dr Race Mathews, National Chairman, Australian Fabian Society
* Stephen Mayne, Business Editor, Crikey
* John McInerney, Councillor, Sydney City Council
* David McKnight, Sydney academic and author of ‘Beyond Left
and Right: New Politics and the Culture Wars’
* Alison McClelland, Associate Professor & Head of School of
Social Work and Social Policy, La Trobe University
* Geoff Mulgan, Director, UK Institute for Community Studies
* Barbara Norman, Deputy Chair, Australian Fabian Society &
Program Director, Environment & Planning, RMIT University
* Michael O’Connor, National Assistant Secretary, Forestry
Division, Construction Forestry, Energy & Mining Union
* Scott Rankin, Writer and Director
* Heather Ridout, CEO, Australian Industry Group
* Guy Rundle, Co-editor, Arena Magazine
** Bill Shorten, National Secretary, AWU** Mark Spiller, Director, Planning Institute of Australia
* Wayne Swan MP, Shadow Treasurer
* Evan Thornley, National Secretary, Australian Fabian Society
and LookSmart Co-founder
* Beth Wilson, Health Services Commissioner of Victoria
* Penny Wong MP, Shadow Minister for Employment & Workforce
Participation
* Tony Wood, Origin Energy
* Professor David Yencken

*Prime Minister:Julia Gillard*

Treasurer:Wayne Swan (Fabian)*
Minister for Trade:Craig Emerson
Minister for Defence:Stephen Smith
Minister for Foreign Affairs:Kevin Rudd
Minister for Finance & Deregulationenny Wong (Fabian)
Minister for Immigration & Citizenship:Chris Bowen (Fabian)
Minister for Infrastructure & Transport:Anthony Albanese (Fabian)
Minister for Health & Ageing:Nicola Roxon
Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development, Local Government & Arts:Simon Crean Fabian)
Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Jobs & Workplace Relations:Chris Evans
Minister for Broadband, Communications & the Digital Economy:Stephen Conroy
Minister for School Education, Early Childhood & Youtheter Garrett
Minister for Resources & Energy / Minister for Tourism:Martin Ferguson
Minister for Climate Change & Energy Efficiency:Greg Combet (Fabian)
Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services & Indigenous Affairs:Jenny Macklin (Fabian)
Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population & Communities:Tony Burke
Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science & Research:Kim Carr (Fabian)
Attorney-General:Robert McClelland
Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries & Forestry:Joe Ludwig
Minister for Human Services:Tanya Plibersek 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXSvV57oB3k&feature=related


----------



## moXJO (26 December 2016)

A big screw you to the liberal party
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2016/12/d...ta-access-to-civil-court-cases-have-your-say/


> Remember the data retention laws that were introduced late last year? It forces telcos to retain metadata on mobile and broadband users for at least two years. The data would assist in criminal and terrorism investigations. Now the Government wants to open the data up to be used for civil lawsuits. It has called for public to comment on the issue. Right before Christmas. Cheeky bastards.




Anyone being able to use your data is a huge privacy issue. Large companies can basically bend you over. The AG must have been promised a job with his mate at village road show.

Send an email to the contact at this link asap as they have tried to do it over the holiday period (end date Jan 13) don't get lazy spam it on social media as well. We have been creeping along the path to zero rights to privacy for a while. Libs doing this is the last straw for me. I won't be voting for these dip$hits again
Link is here
https://www.ag.gov.au/Consultations...communications-data-in-civil-proceedings.aspx


Email is here 
CommunicationsSecurity@ag.gov.au


----------



## Tisme (27 December 2016)

moXJO said:


> Send an email to the contact at this link asap as they have tried to do it over the holiday period (end date Jan 13) don't get lazy spam it on social media as well. We have been creeping along the path to zero rights to privacy for a while. Libs doing this is the last straw for me. I won't be voting for these dip$hits again
> Link is here
> https://www.ag.gov.au/Consultations...communications-data-in-civil-proceedings.aspx




Right wing govts always introduce measures to control the population who don't deserve the right to vote for people who weren't born and raised to rule. Liberal party members have an innate mandate, who must endure the stupidity of the electorate; the unions have the shop floors, the Liberal have the top floors.


----------



## moXJO (27 December 2016)

Actually righties believe in minimal government interference and the right of the individual. Governments deciding for you  for the greater good is what leftists believe in.
The whole left right political position has been watered down into wrong labeling.


----------



## Tisme (28 December 2016)

moXJO said:


> Actually righties believe in minimal government interference and the right of the individual. Governments deciding for you for the greater good is what leftists believe in.
> The whole left right political position has been watered down into wrong labeling




 Unfortunately that is not true if we consider the LNP the holy grail of rightwing politics. The Charles Courts in WA, The Johs and Newmans in Qld, the Boltes in Vic, etc were all authoritarians who pinged the public with Dickensian and autocratic vicissitudes. A zealous desire for puritanical socialism is more the norm for the leaders of that particular party royalty. It doesn't help there is a servile following who rock up at the polling booths and autovote for more freedom flogging instead of demanding choice that favours the man on a Bondi Tram.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> Unfortunately that is not true if we consider the LNP the holy grail of rightwing politics. The Charles Courts in WA, The Johs and Newmans in Qld, the Boltes in Vic, etc were all authoritarians who pinged the public with Dickensian and autocratic vicissitudes. A zealous desire for puritanical socialism is more the norm for the leaders of that particular party royalty. It doesn't help there is a servile following who rock up at the polling booths and autovote for more freedom flogging instead of demanding choice that favours the man on a Bondi Tram.




Funny that Labor governments seem disinclined to unwind these authoritarian measures, like the current "anti terrorism" measures supported by Labor.

We have now got to the point where the "right" to silence and innocent until proven guilty has been overturned in some cases. We are getting to the point where citizens rights are an inconvenience to governments and once legislation is passed its very hard to get it undone.


----------



## PZ99 (29 December 2016)

We've seen over the last few weeks just how the "right" have silenced their own leader on any issue considered remotely progressive (or innovative as they put it).

Ironically, Malcolm Turnbull has always advocated for smaller Government and less interference.
His Government is now 14 seats smaller and is dysfunctional so in a way he got his wish


----------



## Tisme (31 December 2016)

Crikey a fantasy cabinet:



> The first to go, of course, must be Scott Morrison. No other treasurer in Australia’s history in his first 15 months in the job has overseen:




https://www.crikey.com.au/2016/12/20/turnbull-should-appoint-wayne-swan-treasurer/


----------



## SirRumpole (31 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> Crikey a fantasy cabinet:
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.crikey.com.au/2016/12/20/turnbull-should-appoint-wayne-swan-treasurer/




The silly season is well and truly apon us.


----------



## pixel (31 December 2016)

Tisme said:


> Crikey a fantasy cabinet:
> https://www.crikey.com.au/2016/12/20/turnbull-should-appoint-wayne-swan-treasurer/



a fantas*tic* cabinet that might actually achieve some good for Australia


----------



## Tisme (4 January 2017)

Can't say I thought otherwise


----------



## Tisme (4 January 2017)

If this was Bill Shorten, the commission would have been called for xmas day:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-...other-senate-inquiry-about-bell-group/8076438


----------



## Tisme (5 January 2017)

Once again, if this was Rudd or Gillard in charge the Murdoch press would be baying for the PM's head:

http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/diplo...military-cooperation-australia-over-offensive



> According to a Whatsapp circular, the Kopassus Indonesian language trainer heard offensive material in class including that the late Indonesian military leader Sarwo Edhie Wibowo was a mass murderer and that a TNI police officer murdered his friend while drunk.
> 
> He also reportedly saw a laminated piece of paper which said “PANCAGILA”, an offensive mockery of Pancasila, which basically translates as “five crazy principles”.


----------



## overhang (6 January 2017)

Might be a new year but the still the same old mismanaged government.

An authoritarian government that attempted to disguise the data retention policy as a national security issue and yet now they have announced a review into allowing data retention to be used in civil cases.

The class warfare continues in their horribly implemented debt recovery system that is seeing so many people incorrectly issued a debt notice from past Centrelink payments, Malcom Turnbull is no where to be seen on the issue.  Yet what is been done about the $35 billion in unpaid taxes owed to the ATO?

The real leaners are in the Liberal party.  Susan Ley billing tax payers for her trip to the Gold Coast to purchase an 800k property on "impulse" from a Liberal party donor yet can't disclose who she met with and if the property is negatively geared which no doubt it will be as it's the Liberals love child policy.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 January 2017)

overhang said:


> Might be a new year but the still the same old mismanaged government.
> 
> An authoritarian government that attempted to disguise the data retention policy as a national security issue and yet now they have announced a review into allowing data retention to be used in civil cases.
> 
> ...




Yes, the LNP are total cr@p for all the above reasons and more.

Not much else I can say really.


----------



## noco (6 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, the LNP are total cr@p for all the above reasons and more.
> 
> Not much else I can say really.




Yes you can Rumpy...Include the Green/Labor left wing socialist coalition...They are just as bad and that is why we need a revolution in politics....While we have these two useless major parties, the country is going no where......It is going backwards.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 January 2017)

noco said:


> Yes you can Rumpy...Include the Green/Labor left wing socialist coalition...They are just as bad and that is why we need a revolution in politics....While we have these two useless major parties, the country is going no where......It is going backwards.




The GLU (Greens, Labor, Unions) are not in power. The current gov't has stuffed up so badly that the GLU's could hardly be worse.


----------



## noco (7 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The GLU (Greens, Labor, Unions) are not in power. The current gov't has stuffed up so badly that the GLU's could hardly be worse.




But weren't the GLU the start the problem in the first place and have made no effort to help fix it..Don't tell me you have forgotten already as to what happened in 2007/2013...I always have to remind you but I won't bother to go into detail this time as you already know but won't admit it like the rest of the Green/Labor left wing socialist coalition....Juts blame the current government......Grrrrrrrrr!!.

Not that I have any time for Turnbull as I am sure he is working hand in glove with Shorten to wreck this once great nation.


----------



## moXJO (7 January 2017)

Send an email to reject the data retention laws.
Send an email to the contact at this link asap as they have tried to do it over the holiday period (end date Jan 13) don't get lazy spam it on social media as well. 
Link is here
https://www.ag.gov.au/Consultations...communications-data-in-civil-proceedings.aspx


Email is here 
CommunicationsSecurity@ag.gov.au


----------



## Tisme (9 January 2017)

Now that Susan Ley has been caught out doing worse than Peter Slipper, will the Murdoch Liberal Party and it's newspapers hound her out of her career in disgrace? Will a royal commission be held to get to the bottom of the obvious union corruption at the heart of her problem?


----------



## SirRumpole (9 January 2017)

> Labor has continued to call for Federal Health Minister Sussan Ley's resignation amid unanswered questions about more than a dozen taxpayer-funded flights to the Gold Coast, including trips around New Year's Eve in 2013 and 2014.
> 
> Ms Ley charged taxpayers $655 for her flight to the tourist strip at the end of 2013, and a year later, after another Gold Coast New Year's Eve, she charged for her and her partner's flights back to Sydney.
> 
> ...




It goes a lot deeper than just one trip. If Bronwyn got the chop(per) after one helicopter flight, then Ley has to go too.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 January 2017)

It only gets worse...



*Sussan Ley attended Sarina Russo's New Year's Eve parties on taxpayer money*



So why is this businesswoman so important to the formation of government policy ? It sounds more like Party business rather than government business and so she's not entitled to claim for that.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-09/sussan-leys-taxpayer-new-years-with-sarina-russo/8170744


----------



## SirRumpole (9 January 2017)

sptrawler said:


> The LNP needs to bite the bullet and put Abbott back in charge, he shouldn't have been removed, it was stupid to put Turnbull in he was ineffective the first time and nothing has changed.
> 
> Labor proved the folly of flipping leaders and the dumb LNP did exactly the same, all we need do is get the press to run the Country, problem solved.lol




Abbott was even more incompetent than Turnbull. If they are going to change again they have to purge the past and start anew. Unfortunately there are very few Libs who are up to it. Julie Bishop may be their best pick.


----------



## sptrawler (9 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Abbott was even more incompetent than Turnbull. If they are going to change again they have to purge the past and start anew. Unfortunately there are very few Libs who are up to it. Julie Bishop may be their best pick.



Your probably right, but Bishop cracks under pressure, maybe the next generation needs to step up.


----------



## bigdog (9 January 2017)

I believe the Ley apartment was U 34/3645 Main Beach Parade
https://www.realestate.com.au/property/34-3645-main-beach-pde-main-beach-qld-4217

Reported sold $795,000 SOLD May 2015 Ray White Real Estate Main Beach
-- this is a big discount to the prior purchase price of $830,000
-- something smells

This link also reports sold for "$830,000 SOLD Jan 2006"

Ray White Real Estate Main Beach
https://www.realestate.com.au/sold/property-apartment-qld-main+beach-119553739


----------



## Tisme (9 January 2017)

bigdog said:


> I believe the Ley apartment was U 34/3645 Main Beach Parade
> https://www.realestate.com.au/property/34-3645-main-beach-pde-main-beach-qld-4217
> 
> Reported sold $795,000 SOLD May 2015 Ray White Real Estate Main Beach
> ...





Surely you aren't suggesting the sale was subsidised, heaven forbid financial favours would be afoot.


----------



## bellenuit (9 January 2017)

Wasn't it sold by auction? It would be had to manipulate a sale at a "favourable" price in an open auction.


----------



## Tisme (10 January 2017)

bellenuit said:


> Wasn't it sold by auction? It would be had to manipulate a sale at a "favourable" price in an open auction.




 We are talking the home state of the white shoe brigade.


----------



## Tisme (10 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> It only gets worse...
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Unrepentant Bronwyn Bishop doing a Noco and trying to blame the Labor Party and men in general for Sussan Ley's fraud. Apparently her blaming everyone else except her mates, is different to "socialists always blaming someone else , but themselves" .... damn Labor, still governing badly. LOL

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s/news-story/bc1bbd70a4b9de04eefeedd1ef6be9a3


----------



## overhang (10 January 2017)

They're all rotten to the core, both sides that is.  I really wish the left and right party supporters could unite and demand a federal ICAC. Xenophone is about the only one I have faith in atm.

Whats the bet Susan Ley post politics ends up a lobbyist for Sarina Russo's recruitment agency.


----------



## Tisme (10 January 2017)

Should also balance the latest with Bronwyn Bishop's  $1,567, 60.94 extra personal expenses for two financial years 2013 to 2015 and Julie Bishop's $2,844, 209.20 for the same period..... Bill Shorten, the current Prime Ministerial heir presumptive, needs to do something about this, while Malcolm is busy repairing the fragile ar5e his fellow cabinet ministers have ripped another one in yet again.


----------



## Tisme (10 January 2017)

overhang said:


> They're all rotten to the core, both sides that is.  I really wish the left and right party supporters could unite and demand a federal ICAC. Xenophone is about the only one I have faith in atm.
> 
> Whats the bet Susan Ley post politics ends up a lobbyist for Sarina Russo's recruitment agency.





"Sisters" doing it for themselves... be interesting if a reporter picks up on sarina russo christine forster tony abbott linkers.


----------



## noco (10 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> Unrepentant Bronwyn Bishop doing a Noco and trying to blame the Labor Party and men in general for Sussan Ley's fraud. Apparently her blaming everyone else except her mates, is different to "socialists always blaming someone else , but themselves" .... damn Labor, still governing badly. LOL
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s/news-story/bc1bbd70a4b9de04eefeedd1ef6be9a3




What is a NOCO?...Please explain.

As far as I am concerned Bronwyn Bishop got all she deserved as have many Labor MPs....

If Susan Ley has done the wrong thing then she will also get what she deserves also.

You lefties are self appointed judge and jury before Ley is found guilty....Your favorite MPs Mark Dreyfus and Penny Wong are always saying when a Labor MP is in trouble, they are innocent until proven guilty as was the case Craig Thomson.....Your beloved Fabian Julia Gillard defended him until the death.


----------



## explod (10 January 2017)

noco said:


> What is a NOCO?...Please explain.



Someone who thinks he's the only one that knows anything and describes all others outside his understanding and or thinking as lefties, Fabians or commos.

Cant really argue with that.  My Dad described them as "cockalooras"  And he was a Liberal too.


----------



## Tisme (10 January 2017)

explod said:


> Someone who thinks he's the only one that knows anything and describes all others outside his understanding and or thinking as lefties, Fabians or commos.
> 
> Cant really argue with that.  My Dad described them as "cockalooras"  And he was a Liberal too.





See I would have said a NOCO is a fella who is denial about his true hardcore socialistic bent, but has a hard time coming out of the closet on the issue. As a real right winger I can spot tarnished pewter trying to be polished sterling silver a mile off, troll or no troll. Denial is  not just a river in Egypt.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 January 2017)

Is the AFL Grand Final business or pleasure ?



If you are a pollie, it's business.



*Political expenses: Julie Bishop charged taxpayers for Portsea Polo trip, Mathias Cormann claimed for AFL final*



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-10/julie-bishop-charged-taxpayers-for-trip-to-polo/8173542


----------



## overhang (11 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Is the AFL Grand Final business or pleasure ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




So 3 ministers were invited as guests of NAB to the AFL grand final which included complimentary tickets and catering, those 3 ministers were Finance Minister Mathias Cormann, Trade Minister Steve Ciobo and David Bushby the Tasmanian Senator.  All 3 men have spoken above and beyond to reject a RC into the banking sector.  They can not possibly be seen to be acting in the publics best interest by attending an event as a guests to a corporate giant in an industry that has come under a lot of scrutiny and faced calls for a Royal Commission.


----------



## Tisme (11 January 2017)

overhang said:


> So 3 ministers were invited as guests of NAB to the AFL grand final which included complimentary tickets and catering, those 3 ministers were Finance Minister Mathias Cormann, Trade Minister Steve Ciobo and David Bushby the Tasmanian Senator.  All 3 men have spoken above and beyond to reject a RC into the banking sector.  They can not possibly be seen to be acting in the publics best interest by attending an event as a guests to a corporate giant in an industry that has come under a lot of scrutiny and faced calls for a Royal Commission.




A classic trigger for a royal commission into union corruption and a Bill Shorten witch hunt..... never could trust socialists.


----------



## bigdog (11 January 2017)

Herald Sun Melb reported
"It can now be revealed the Liberal Party donor who sold his luxury apartment to Ms Ley, at a loss, was given a $109,977 grant for his daycare business when she was childcare minister.

Education Department contract documents reveal Children First Learning Centres, owned by vendor Martin Corkery, received the government grant for three daycare centres in November 2014, when Ms Ley was Assistant Education Minister.

Six months later, she bought his luxury De Ville apartment “on a whim’’ during a taxpayer-funded trip."

------------------------------------------------------------------
*what would this property purchased in April 2006 for $830,000 be really worth in June 2015 (nine years later)????*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe the Ley apartment was Unit 34/3645 Main Beach Parade
https://www.realestate.com.au/property/34-3645-main-beach-pde-main-beach-qld-4217

http://www.onthehouse.com.au/11492899/34_3645_main_beach_pde_main_beach_qld_4217

Sold: $795,000 09 JUN 2015 Source: Government(sold to Ley)
*Sold: $830,000 21 APR 2006* Source: Government (sold to Martin Corkery)
Sold: $455,000 10 JUN 2002 Source: Government


----------



## bellenuit (11 January 2017)

Bigdog,

Not ruling out that there may have been corruption, but one can always present information in a way that suggests that. Being sceptical of much of what I read, I would ask the following questions:

Was it sold at auction? If so, were there other (at arms length) bidders? Were they prevented from bidding?

What has been the average change in property prices of similar properties in the same area over the same time period? Property prices have been falling in some areas for a few years.

Was the grant he received for his childcare centres given to all childcare centres or just his?

I would like to see answers to the above before I would jump to conclusions.


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Abbott was even more incompetent than Turnbull. If they are going to change again they have to purge the past and start anew. Unfortunately there are very few Libs who are up to it. Julie Bishop may be their best pick.




On second thoughts, I don't think you're right, I just wasn't feeling confrontational.
Abbott, is still the best option for the LNP and Australia, it is just the media and Laborites that think otherwise.
People have had a chance, to see what it is like to have Bill Shortens twin running the country, I'm sure no one is happy on either side of politics.
You just have to read this thread, to see there is no passion or direction in politics, just insipid lack lustre directionless leadership.
That goes for both sides, neither has any drive, charisma, leadership qualities.
The really sad bit is they aren't believable, at least Abbott scared the crap out of the media.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 January 2017)

sptrawler said:


> On second thoughts, I don't think you're right, I just wasn't feeling confrontational.
> Abbott, is still the best option for the LNP and Australia, it is just the media and Laborites that think otherwise.
> People have had a chance, to see what it is like to have Bill Shortens twin running the country, I'm sure no one is happy on either side of politics.
> You just have to read this thread, to see there is no passion or direction in politics, just insipid lack lustre directionless leadership.
> ...





I guess you can believe what you like, but as they say you are dreaming.

After the Peta Credlin 'affair' , people will never vote for Abbott again.

The way he let someone else run him and order him around shows that he has no management ability whatever, no spine or the ability to make his own decisions.

He's dead political meat but unfortunately some still think he can make a comeback. That says volumes for the state of politics on both sides and why people are turning to alternatives like Hanson or Xenephon.

Neither Abbott, Turnbull or Shorten are the future. Turnbull and Shorten will probably fight out the next election as weak as they are unless there is a major scandal. Maybe the pollie perks fiasco is just another small step on the way to the further discreditation of a corrupt system on both sides and perhaps new leaders will emerge from the ashes.


----------



## sptrawler (12 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I guess you can believe what you like, but as they say you are dreaming.
> 
> After the Peta Credlin 'affair' , people will never vote for Abbott again.
> 
> ...



Funny you say that, when Gillard and the media, were painting him out to be a male sexist pig.

Bit ironic really.lol

The reality is Abbott, would do a Trump, that's why Hanson and Xenophon are now in the headlights of the media.
Have you noticed how much attention Fairfax are giving Hanson.lol


----------



## SirRumpole (12 January 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Funny you say that, when Gillard and the media, were painting him out to be a male sexist pig.
> 
> Bit ironic really.lol
> 
> ...




Just another nail in his political coffin. He's unelectable. Period.

As for doing a Trump, our electoral system is much different to that of the US. There are more choices than just two people. The far Right is a splinter group here and people don't like what they see in it, which is why 'Mediscare' hit home.


----------



## noirua (12 January 2017)

Basically Australia needs to expand rapidly. For the size of country the population needs to quadruple. That in itself would help when considering the populations of America and Europe. The oncoming power rush by China and expansion of India make the Aussie outfit look rather small and scrawny.  So the Turnbull Government or any other Government needs to get its act together.  If you asked anyone in Britain who is Prime Minister of Australia, few would know and even worse, even fewer care. Maybe there is a need to have someone who is a good strong personality. 

Maybe a PM should have a Twitter account and make outrageous statements. All he or she needs to do is make a list of the tweets on 'The Donalds' Twitter account and follow the same flow. 

Australia is a great big country with amazing prospects but so many seem to suffer from inward thinking.


----------



## Logique (12 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> It only gets worse...
> *Sussan Ley attended Sarina Russo's New Year's Eve parties on taxpayer money*
> So why is this businesswoman so important to the formation of government policy ? It sounds more like Party business rather than government business and so she's not entitled to claim for that.
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-09/sussan-leys-taxpayer-new-years-with-sarina-russo/8170744



Apparently the third 's' in the name was added accoring to numerology.

Pilots have to keep up their flying hours to retain their accreditation. It seems taxpayers have been shouting the aircraft hire for Ley. It's really too bad. Sam Dastyari was held to account, and so too should Sussan Ley.


----------



## McLovin (12 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Just another nail in his political coffin. He's unelectable. Period.
> 
> As for doing a Trump, our electoral system is much different to that of the US. There are more choices than just two people. The far Right is a splinter group here and people don't like what they see in it, which is why 'Mediscare' hit home.




Don't forget compulsory voting. That keeps things more centred. Trump won with 25% of the voting age population.


----------



## noco (12 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Just another nail in his political coffin. He's unelectable. Period.
> 
> As for doing a Trump, our electoral system is much different to that of the US. There are more choices than just two people. The far Right is a splinter group here and people don't like what they see in it, which is why 'Mediscare' hit home.




MEDISCARE???????????One of the greatest political lies ever put out by the Green/Labor left wing Fabian coalition....As Richo once said, " WHAT EVER IT TAKES".

Only the naive believed Shorten with his GREAT MEDISCARE.

The people with brains realized nobody would buy Medicare when the intake was $11 billion and the outgoings are $23 billion.....But of course most of us know there are not too many brains in the Labor Party...All ex union hacks who only know how to do dirty deals.


----------



## noco (12 January 2017)

Why Abbott may never come back as leader.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s/news-story/093bc5cc8cf730b32f5a83672faac619


----------



## PZ99 (12 January 2017)

noco said:


> Why Abbott may never come back as leader.
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s/news-story/093bc5cc8cf730b32f5a83672faac619



Any chance of a copy of the article? Can't be read unless you subscribe to it.


----------



## noco (12 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Any chance of a copy of the article? Can't be read unless you subscribe to it.




No problem.

*Opinion: Malcolm Turnbull should tear up Paris Agreement on renewable energy targets





Rowan Dean, The Courier-Mail
January 12, 2017 6:08am
Subscriber only




THE reason some Liberals and journalists insist that Tony Abbott can’t come back is not because they think he’d be no good, but because they can’t bear to admit they were wrong.

Wrong that Malcolm Turnbull would be a better prime minister than Abbott. He isn’t. Wrong that Turnbull would win more seats than Abbott would have at the last election. He didn’t. Wrong to stoop as low as Labor and tear down their own leader. Wrong to freak out Liberal “bed-wetters” by exaggerating Abbott’s weaknesses and downplaying his strengths.

Onions and knighthoods are trivial; stopping boats, cutting expenditure and fighting Islamism are not.

Wrong to denigrate Abbott’s chief of staff Peta Credlin. Most CEOs would give their right hand for such talent. Wrong to buy the line that Turnbull has an economic narrative to sell. He doesn’t.

So instead of admitting they were wrong on all these fronts and admitting that Abbott should have had their full support to complete his first term, including making the inevitable mistakes a new prime minister makes, they compound their initial error by refusing to countenance his return. They are wrong again.

The video connection was lost
Please check your internet connection and try again
 Autoplay 









China to plow $360 billion into renewable fuel by 2020
Abbott was made prime minister by the Australian public in 2013 in a landslide because he was viewed, rightly, as the only leader at the time capable of securing our borders. Which he did. Is there another scenario where Abbott might be the only leader capable of taking firm action?

Although Turnbull has kept the boats stopped, is starting to make the right noises on Islamic terrorism and appears to be prepared to tackle MPs expenses, there is one issue where he and his team have made a colossal blunder. And that’s on climate change and our relationship with the White House.

The election of Donald Trump blindsided Team Turnbull. They were so cocksure about a Clinton win that in September, when Malcolm made his grand entrance at the UN in New York, he didn’t even bother to make contact with Trump – the Republican nominee for the White House. Big mistake.

Then, displaying the most breathtaking arrogance, within a few hours of Trump’s victory, Turnbull and Julie Bishop ratified the Paris Agreement on renewable energy targets. An even bigger mistake. This is the deal that Trump has said he will “tear up” because it threatens US economic prosperity. And ours.

Turnbull’s chief scientist Alan Finkel admits we will never meet the Paris targets without a significant economic impact. He wants an emissions scheme. Better just to scrap the targets.

Otherwise, as ideological basket cases like South Australia and Victoria blow up their own coal power stations, taxpayers and businesses can look forward to a bleak future of unreliable electricity and skyrocketing bills.

Pause
 0:00
/
 2:24

Fullscreen
 Autoplay 









India to Ratify Paris Climate-Change Pact
Increasingly, the elderly and poor won’t be able to afford airconditioning or heating and shops will be chucking out hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of goods every blackout. In one blackout SA businesses lost $367 million. So much for “jobs and growth”! The public will not quickly forgive those Labor premiers who have wantonly vandalised our cheap energy.

If Trump does tear up the Paris Agreement, 2017 will be the year the climate con ends. The alternative is: Are you prepared to see everyday Aussies pay much higher electricity bills for no tangible environmental benefit?

Those politicians who are honest about climate change admit there is nothing we can do to reduce global emissions in any meaningful way. Will conservative Liberals happily sit by while One Nation steals their seats by telling this truth?

At some point, we are going to have to change direction on renewable energy policy; abandon the Paris targets and focus on growing our economy through every means possible, particularly using what has always been our natural advantage – cheap coal.

Although Turnbull claims he wants reliable, affordable energy, is he prepared to tear up the Paris Agreement? If Trump does, and Turnbull refuses to, we will deliberately be impoverishing ourselves while America gets richer. That way lies madness. And the end of Turnbull’s leadership.

Abbott certainly made mistakes in his first term, but since being dumped he has shown a willingness to own up to, and correct those errors.

When Australia is finally forced to abandon the climate change/renewables farce, being the PM who scrapped the carbon tax will look pretty good on your leadership CV.*


----------



## noco (12 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Any chance of a copy of the article? Can't be read unless you subscribe to it.




No problem.

*Opinion: Malcolm Turnbull should tear up Paris Agreement on renewable energy targets




Rowan Dean, The Courier-Mail
January 12, 2017 6:08am
Subscriber only




THE reason some Liberals and journalists insist that Tony Abbott can’t come back is not because they think he’d be no good, but because they can’t bear to admit they were wrong.

Wrong that Malcolm Turnbull would be a better prime minister than Abbott. He isn’t. Wrong that Turnbull would win more seats than Abbott would have at the last election. He didn’t. Wrong to stoop as low as Labor and tear down their own leader. Wrong to freak out Liberal “bed-wetters” by exaggerating Abbott’s weaknesses and downplaying his strengths.

Onions and knighthoods are trivial; stopping boats, cutting expenditure and fighting Islamism are not.

Wrong to denigrate Abbott’s chief of staff Peta Credlin. Most CEOs would give their right hand for such talent. Wrong to buy the line that Turnbull has an economic narrative to sell. He doesn’t.

So instead of admitting they were wrong on all these fronts and admitting that Abbott should have had their full support to complete his first term, including making the inevitable mistakes a new prime minister makes, they compound their initial error by refusing to countenance his return. They are wrong again.

The video connection was lost
Please check your internet connection and try again
 Autoplay 









China to plow $360 billion into renewable fuel by 2020
Abbott was made prime minister by the Australian public in 2013 in a landslide because he was viewed, rightly, as the only leader at the time capable of securing our borders. Which he did. Is there another scenario where Abbott might be the only leader capable of taking firm action?

Although Turnbull has kept the boats stopped, is starting to make the right noises on Islamic terrorism and appears to be prepared to tackle MPs expenses, there is one issue where he and his team have made a colossal blunder. And that’s on climate change and our relationship with the White House.

The election of Donald Trump blindsided Team Turnbull. They were so cocksure about a Clinton win that in September, when Malcolm made his grand entrance at the UN in New York, he didn’t even bother to make contact with Trump – the Republican nominee for the White House. Big mistake.

Then, displaying the most breathtaking arrogance, within a few hours of Trump’s victory, Turnbull and Julie Bishop ratified the Paris Agreement on renewable energy targets. An even bigger mistake. This is the deal that Trump has said he will “tear up” because it threatens US economic prosperity. And ours.

Turnbull’s chief scientist Alan Finkel admits we will never meet the Paris targets without a significant economic impact. He wants an emissions scheme. Better just to scrap the targets.

Otherwise, as ideological basket cases like South Australia and Victoria blow up their own coal power stations, taxpayers and businesses can look forward to a bleak future of unreliable electricity and skyrocketing bills.

Pause
 0:00
/
 2:24

Fullscreen
 Autoplay 









India to Ratify Paris Climate-Change Pact
Increasingly, the elderly and poor won’t be able to afford airconditioning or heating and shops will be chucking out hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of goods every blackout. In one blackout SA businesses lost $367 million. So much for “jobs and growth”! The public will not quickly forgive those Labor premiers who have wantonly vandalised our cheap energy.

If Trump does tear up the Paris Agreement, 2017 will be the year the climate con ends. The alternative is: Are you prepared to see everyday Aussies pay much higher electricity bills for no tangible environmental benefit?

Those politicians who are honest about climate change admit there is nothing we can do to reduce global emissions in any meaningful way. Will conservative Liberals happily sit by while One Nation steals their seats by telling this truth?

At some point, we are going to have to change direction on renewable energy policy; abandon the Paris targets and focus on growing our economy through every means possible, particularly using what has always been our natural advantage – cheap coal.

Although Turnbull claims he wants reliable, affordable energy, is he prepared to tear up the Paris Agreement? If Trump does, and Turnbull refuses to, we will deliberately be impoverishing ourselves while America gets richer. That way lies madness. And the end of Turnbull’s leadership.

Abbott certainly made mistakes in his first term, but since being dumped he has shown a willingness to own up to, and correct those errors.

When Australia is finally forced to abandon the climate change/renewables farce, being the PM who scrapped the carbon tax will look pretty good on your leadership CV.*


----------



## SirRumpole (12 January 2017)

Self delusion is rife among Abbott supporters.

The only reason the Libs squeaked back in is that Abbott was deposed. If he was leader at the last election the Libs would be toast. I really don't see how any intelligent person would think that Abbott is anything like acceptable to the public any more.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 January 2017)

Ley has set the trend, and other rorters should follow, like Julie Bishop.

*Health Minister Sussan Ley resigns over travel expense scandal*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-...signation-parliament-expenses-scandal/8180602


----------



## noco (13 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Ley has set the trend, and other rorters should follow, like Julie Bishop.
> 
> *Health Minister Sussan Ley resigns over travel expense scandal*
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-...signation-parliament-expenses-scandal/8180602



And smiles all around amongst the Fabians...We are all now so happy little Vegemites....Halal approved of course........BORING...BORING..BORING...Give it a break Rumpy, that was old news this morning......Have you been asleep at the wheel?

But as I stated previously if she, as have so   many Labor MPs  have been caught out before, then she deserves all that is coming to her....Don't think she will go to jail like Eddie Obieb though.


----------



## PZ99 (13 January 2017)

If she goes to jail she'll claim the travel & accommodation expenses and maybe even get some frequent flyer points. lol


----------



## noco (13 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> If she goes to jail she'll claim the travel & accommodation expenses and maybe even get some frequent flyer points. lol




I think your nuts are getting hold of your brain......I think people on this forum expect better debate than that.

But as they say, there has to be clown in every circus.


----------



## PZ99 (13 January 2017)

noco said:


> I think your nuts are getting hold of your brain......I think people on this forum expect better debate than that.
> 
> But as they say, there has to be clown in every circus.



500 clowns out of work and you wanna be one?

Have a look at your first sentence and show us this quality debate you demand of others noco.

Then get yourself a sense of humour


----------



## noco (13 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> 500 clowns out of work and you wanna be one?
> 
> Have a look at your first sentence and show us this quality debate you demand of others noco.
> 
> Then get yourself a sense of humour




Well. you deserved it......It was showing up your juvenile mirth which did not lend to the debate....It was a complete match.

500 clowns out of work.....Are they ones about to lose their jobs as a  result of Danial Andrews closing down Hazelwood power station?

 At least I don't get angry......When anger arises, think of the consequences


----------



## PZ99 (13 January 2017)

noco said:


> Well. you deserved it......It was showing up your juvenile mirth which did not lend to the debate....It was a complete match.
> 
> 500 clowns out of work.....Are they ones about to lose their jobs as a  result of Danial Andrews closing down Hazelwood power station?
> 
> At least I don't get angry......When anger arises, think of the consequences



What a hilarious load of garbage. Juvenile mirth says more about your posts than mine. No one deserves that.

Daniel Andrews closing down Hazelwood power station? That what happens when Liberal parties privatise infrastructure.

Clearly you have no idea. The more you post the more stupid you look.


----------



## noco (14 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> What a hilarious load of garbage. Juvenile mirth says more about your posts than mine. No one deserves that.
> 
> Daniel Andrews closing down Hazelwood power station? That what happens when Liberal parties privatise infrastructure.
> 
> Clearly you have no idea. The more you post the more stupid you look.




I think you should clear your head and look at the real reason why Hazelwood Power station will be blown up....You know what the real reason is and if you don't then you are dumber than I thought you were.

It is the stupid policy of Andrews and Weatherill who have gone overboard with this renewable energy crap....You just cannot turn on and turn off a base load coal fired power station when the Sun don't shine and the wind don't blow so they have made them nonviable to operate....Do you really understand how a coal fired power station operates?...On top of that Andrews increased the royalties on coal in Victoria 3 fold so what chance did they have?.

Time will tell very soon how power in SA is constantly disrupted and how the price of power will rise making more business in SA nonviable.......Weatherill is suggesting business install there own generators which as we all know will expose more gases into the atmosphere and defeating the purpose of their own renewable energy policy to save the Earth from CO2......Those two Labor clowns just don't know what they are doing and both of them will out on their ears at the next state election.


----------



## PZ99 (14 January 2017)

noco said:


> I think you should clear your head and look at the real reason why Hazelwood Power station will be blown up....You know what the real reason is and if you don't then you are dumber than I thought you were.



That says more about you than it does about me. Hazelwood Power station was privatised by the Kennett Govt. What happens after that has nothing to do with the Govt. That's why they privatise things. 
Do you really understand what happens when a coal fired power station is privatised?

Or are you just here to troll the thread?


----------



## SirRumpole (14 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Or are you just here to troll the thread?




Ah, so you have cottoned on.


----------



## Tisme (14 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> That says more about you than it does about me. Hazelwood Power station was privatised by the Kennett Govt. What happens after that has nothing to do with the Govt. That's why they privatise things.
> Do you really understand what happens when a coal fired power station is privatised?
> 
> Or are you just here to troll the thread?





He's just discovered trolling a few months back and been playing  like a boy with two d1cks ever since. As with all things in their infancy, time and patience must be observed by cultivated peers.


----------



## bigdog (14 January 2017)

Domestic flights should all be economy hence forth for our politicians (not busines class)

The grubs will no longer want to travel

Problem solved!


----------



## noco (14 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> That says more about you than it does about me. Hazelwood Power station was privatised by the Kennett Govt. What happens after that has nothing to do with the Govt. That's why they privatise things.
> Do you really understand what happens when a coal fired power station is privatised?
> 
> Or are you just here to troll the thread?




Troll...That is the easy way out for you Rumpole....That is the typical Fabian way in an attempt to discredit someone you do not agree with....You lefties are always right and everyone else is wrong..Pssst...Wake up to your selves and start to realise there are other people around who have different perspective on matters.

If you don't believe me about how coal fired power stations work, the do your own research


----------



## PZ99 (14 January 2017)

noco said:


> You lefties are always right



Well that was pretty funny. LOL

Privatisation is a means to an end according to the right


----------



## noco (14 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Well that was pretty funny. LOL




I will rephrase it so your muffled head can understand.

You lefties maintain you are always correct......Does that make it more simple for your juvenile mind to understand


----------



## SirRumpole (14 January 2017)

noco said:


> You lefties maintain you are always correct......Does that make it more simple for your juvenile mind to understand




Actually I don't think the "Left" is always correct.

Their refugee policy was a shambles that resulted in people drowning and massive expense to the Australian taxpayer.

In other respects though I think Labor is more inclined to think about their policies rather than have a slavish obedience to "free market" and privatisation policies. Hawke and Keating cut tariffs to the bone which was more representative of "Right" policies. I don't think they were correct there either as most of our manufacturing not to mention TCF industries has disappeared.

Liberal vs Labor is really a "phony war" these days. Both are now Right of centre and trying desperately to exploit minor points of difference to make us believe that it's chalk and cheese between them.


----------



## PZ99 (14 January 2017)

noco said:


> I will rephrase it so your muffled head can understand.
> *Us elitist righties maintain we are always correct*......Does that make it more simple for your juvenile mind to understand



There you go. Put that in your fig & jam sandwich


----------



## noco (14 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> There you go. Put that in your fig & jam sandwich



Wow, now you are getting desperate with kind of expression.....Where did you learn that one from? .....Was it at school yesterday?


----------



## PZ99 (14 January 2017)

noco said:


> Wow, now you are getting desperate



No mate. Just corrected your post by deflecting back your anger


----------



## noco (14 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> No mate. Just corrected your post by deflecting back your anger




What anger????...I don't get angry.

PZ99....I have tried to keep a sane mind with you and I am winning, because at my age I don't stoop to the same low level some people go to in an attempt to win an argument

Confucius says,
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance."


----------



## PZ99 (14 January 2017)

noco said:


> What anger????...I don't get angry.
> 
> PZ99....I have tried to keep a sane mind with you and...



... you have failed. Because no-one with a sane mind has a need to resort to name calling and trolling like you do almost every time you post.

An attempt by me to lighten things up around here with a harmless joke and you go off your rocker.

There's something wrong with your sense of humour.


----------



## noco (15 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> ... you have failed. Because no-one with a sane mind has a need to resort to name calling and trolling like you do almost every time you post.
> 
> An attempt by me to lighten things up around here with a harmless joke and you go off your rocker.
> 
> There's something wrong with your sense of humour.




Just more of the same old boring ridicule and insinuation which I come to expect from you...I believe they call it trolling.

Sarcasm, is the lowest form of wit from the uneducated.


----------



## PZ99 (15 January 2017)

noco said:


> Just more of the same old boring ridicule and insinuation which I come to expect from you...I believe they call it trolling.



Everything you've just feebly stated is your inability to see the funny side of life.

I believe more people call you a troll than me so please continue advertising your unhappiness in life noco.


noco said:


> Sarcasm, is the lowest form of wit from the uneducated.



Then now might be a good time for you to stop doing it.


----------



## noco (15 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Everything you've just feebly stated is your inability to see the funny side of life.
> 
> I believe more people call you a troll than me so please continue advertising your unhappiness in life noco.
> 
> Then now might be a good time for you to stop doing it.




You are really something, aren't you.......You take things, mix them all up and spit them out to make yourself look good.......Is it any wonder why this thread lacks input from other conservatives......They just don't like ratbag replies from the Fabians who like control the proceedings.

You seem have this inferiority  complex that I am unhappy with my life ....What a load of rubbish that comes out of your mouth....More ridicule and character assassination which stops others from posting.

I think it is time to reassess your thinking instead of being a smart a$$.


----------



## PZ99 (15 January 2017)

noco said:


> I think it is time to reassess your thinking instead of being a smart a$$.



I think it's time for you to stop attacking me before you vapourise your credibility to anyone with an IQ higher than a noco.

You can start by retracting your nuts around head comment.


----------



## noco (15 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> I think it's time for you to stop attacking me before you vapourise your credibility to anyone with an IQ higher than a noco.
> 
> You can start by retracting your nuts around head comment.




More self opinionated assessment of yourself......Get back on the topic for a change.....The thread is about Bill Shorten.


----------



## PZ99 (15 January 2017)

noco said:


> More self opinionated assessment of yourself......



Again, that says everything about you and nothing about me.


noco said:


> Get back on the topic for a change.....The thread is about Bill Shorten.



Actually, no it's not. It's about the Turnbull Govt. Try reading your browser header.
Get on topic yourself.


----------



## noco (15 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Again, that says everything about you and nothing about me.
> 
> Actually, no it's not. It's about the Turnbull Govt. Try reading your browser header.
> Get on topic yourself.




Yes you are right for a change...I did get them mixed up but that does not change anything.


----------



## PZ99 (15 January 2017)

noco said:


> Yes you are right for a change...I did get them mixed up but that does not change anything.



Very true. Everything in post 1519 is correct. Yes I've noticed we are in agreeance.


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2017)

I have a few statements/queries on the shutdown of Hazelwood power station:

the boss of the private owners slated economic inviability as the reason for the closures;

although the station is owned by ENGIE , the state govt is getting the blame for market forces;

Engies' own mission statement: "_The 21st century will mark the end of fossil fuels, which will gradually be replaced by energy from decarbonized renewable resources, such as solar power. (…) Alongside large-scale plants (…), we will see the emergence of a multiplicity of decentralized local generating facilities"_, ENGIE CEO Isabelle Kocher (_Le Monde_, May 4, 2016);

the LNP's federal govt saw the end of industry financial support and closure of manufacturing in SA and Vic;

I'm guessing that the viability of the operating a large power station, in a crowded market where manufacturing is dying, might just be the real reason continued loss making ventures like Hazelwood are being closed?

I'm guessing if I ran a codependency analysis on the only two variables : LNP federal policy and Power generation in post industrial Victoria, there would be a convincing correlation.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> I'm guessing that the viability of the operating a large power station , in a crowded market where manufacturing is dying might just be the real reason continued loss making ventures like Hazelwood are being closed?




I suggest that the takeup of rooftop solar PV has also reduced electricity demand and led to unviability of large scale power stations.

Trouble is that baseload generation is still needed at night and what is going to provide that ?

I further suggest that selling of power generators to private companies was and is a stupid idea, as financial viability of generators must take second place to continuity and reliability of supply so therefore it's necessary for power generators to take a loss sometimes to keep the juices flowing. Private enterprise is not going to absorb those losses so generators need to be State owned.


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I suggest that the takeup of rooftop solar PV has also reduced electricity demand and led to unviability of large scale power stations.
> 
> Trouble is that baseload generation is still needed at night and what is going to provide that ?
> 
> I further suggest that selling of power generators to private companies was and is a stupid idea, as financial viability of generators must take second place to continuity and reliability of supply so therefore it's necessary for power generators to take a loss sometimes to keep the juices flowing. Private enterprise is not going to absorb those losses so generators need to be State owned.




I remember thinking how clever the end of the 19th century builders of the railways workshops in WA were, in making it convertible to any war effort. It had its own power station, smelters, etc. I'm sure detente was always a goal, but the practicalities of being an isolated island nation/state in an ocean of barbarian ar5eholes were obviously in need of pragmatic readiness.

I don't see the ocean having changed much, perhaps a rising tide, but our preparedness does seem to have devolved back to hollis bollis dependency mode?


----------



## SirRumpole (16 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> I don't see the ocean having changed much, perhaps a rising tide, but our preparedness does seem to have devolved back to hollis bollis dependency mode?




I think it's an increasing desire by politicians to rid themselves of as much responsibility that they can for their bad decisions. If power prices go up then it's now the electricity company's fault not theirs.

Trouble for the pollies is that people will still blame them and vote them out if they don't like utility privatisation.

Trouble for us is that the other side won't promise to buy them back because they don't want the baggage of actually having to make decisions.


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I think it's an increasing desire by politicians to rid themselves of as much responsibility that they can for their bad decisions. If power prices go up then it's now the electricity company's fault not theirs.
> 
> Trouble for the pollies is that people will still blame them and vote them out if they don't like utility privatisation.
> 
> Trouble for us is that the other side won't promise to buy them back because they don't want the baggage of actually having to make decisions.




Politicians flock together in unions by another name. Being union members means they are bound by the party politik. I think if we looked back at various nation building periods there are strong autocratic leaders like Forrest, Curtin, Chifley, Whitlam, Hawke/Keating.... I'm sure their are conservatives in the wannabe mix (e.g. Charles Court), but that would be an oxymoron in conversation.

The last major try was the NBN, which was made a farce by ubiquitous opportunism and bloody mindedness, leading us to the impotent and insipid leadership we have now.

We can only hope for the emergence of a breakout and inspirational teflon warrior come the next poll. ... likely wont happen, but we can dream.


----------



## noco (16 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I suggest that the takeup of rooftop solar PV has also reduced electricity demand and led to unviability of large scale power stations.
> 
> Trouble is that baseload generation is still needed at night and what is going to provide that ?
> 
> I further suggest that selling of power generators to private companies was and is a stupid idea, as financial viability of generators must take second place to continuity and reliability of supply so therefore it's necessary for power generators to take a loss sometimes to keep the juices flowing. Private enterprise is not going to absorb those losses so generators need to be State owned.




So if they were state owned and they had to run at a loss, who pays for that loss?

Does the difference come out of that states consolidated revenue or is it passed onto the consumer in the form of higher power prices?

If the loss is taken up by the Government, then some other important piece of infrastructure has to miss out.

Somebody has to pay in the end


----------



## SirRumpole (16 January 2017)

noco said:


> Does the difference come out of that states consolidated revenue or is it passed onto the consumer in the form of higher power prices?




The difference could well be returned to the government by being able to supply cheap power to business and industry and those businesses using those savings to create more employment leading to more GST revenue and income taxes.


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2017)

noco said:


> So if they were state owned and they had to run at a loss, who pays for that loss?
> 
> Does the difference come out of that states consolidated revenue or is it passed onto the consumer in the form of higher power prices?
> 
> ...




I would suggest the conversation has moved from simplistic bipolar politics and blame games to whether the viability of privatisation could lead us to a situation of closures, wherein we lack the grunt needed to restart industry after a force majure event.... events that are likely to increase as climate change bites.

Only the govt purse could keep a major power station and its feeder industries in standby mode while securing our defensive capabilities.


----------



## noco (16 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The difference could well be returned to the government by being able to supply cheap power to business and industry and those businesses using those savings to create more employment leading to more GST revenue and income taxes.




Hang on Rumpy, you are  talking about the loss difference of state owned coal fired  power stations burning  coal being returned to the Government?

There will be no savings if the state run power stations have to run at a loss. 

I have doubts about the supply of cheap power to business and industry creating more jobs...And where does the GST fit in to all of this?  I have doubts about the GST and other income taxes taking up the difference....Perhaps you might try to convince me with some dollars figures to back up your argument....Hearsay certainly does not have any infuence. 

We have already observed in South Australia where power prices have risen dramatically reducing business and industry profits which in the end affects job losses......Some business in SA are reconsidering their position in that state since Jay Weathrill has suggested that business and industry install their own power generators which will defeat the purpose of reducing green house gases....Those diesel generators will emit heaps of gases into the air.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 January 2017)

noco said:


> I have doubts about the supply of cheap power to business and industry creating more jobs...




Well, you seemed keen on Turnbull's business tax cuts creating jobs, surely cuts to operating costs would do that too ? Don't you want businesses to be able to cut their costs ?


----------



## noco (16 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> I would suggest the conversation has moved from simplistic bipolar politics and blame games to whether the viability of privatisation could lead us to a situation of closures, wherein we lack the grunt needed to restart industry after a force majure event.... events that are likely to increase as climate change bites.
> 
> Only the govt purse could keep a major power station and its feeder industries in standby mode while securing our defensive capabilities.




From what I have learned, it is not possible to have a coal fired power station on stand by mode...Coal fired power stations do take a considerable time from start up to production of power....Coal has to burn to produce steam up to a high pressure to run the turbines and it just cannot happen at the flick of a switch as you believe.

Coal fired power stations have to run 24/7 to be viable and is still one of the cheapest and more efficient ways of producing power....Coal fired power is 35% efficient compared to wind and solar at 15% and lets not forget wind and solar have been highly subsidized to get where it is today.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 January 2017)

noco said:


> Coal fired power stations have to run 24/7 to be viable and is still one of the cheapest and more efficient ways of producing power....Coal fired power is 35% efficient compared to wind and solar at 15% and lets not forget wind and solar have been highly subsidized to get where it is today.




Conversion efficiency is not the only factor to consider with power generation. Cost of coal + transportation >> cost of wind or sunlight. As for subsidies, coal has been subsidised for decades.


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2017)

noco said:


> From what I have learned, it is not possible to have a coal fired power station on stand by mode...Coal fired power stations do take a considerable time from start up to production of power....Coal has to burn to produce steam up to a high pressure to run the turbines and it just cannot happen at the flick of a switch as you believe.
> 
> Coal fired power stations have to run 24/7 to be viable and is still one of the cheapest and more efficient ways of producing power....Coal fired power is 35% efficient compared to wind and solar at 15% and lets not forget wind and solar have been highly subsidized to get where it is today.




I have experience in building and starting up coal fired power stations. It is true there are long times involved in getting a mothballed facility up to speed, the rolling stock scheduled, water resource secured, the mines crushing, etc which is why it behoves responsible govt to protect it constituents from power failure, especially during transitional technological periods, to have the standby ready; perhaps with some kind of preheating happening.

Unforgiveable getting caught with our pants down because of some idealogical want for all things laissez-faire capitalism, which has had to have feedback boundaries placed on it because of its inherent open loop failures to the majority of the population and nation


----------



## noco (16 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Well, you seemed keen on Turnbull's business tax cuts creating jobs, surely cuts to operating costs would do that too ? Don't you want businesses to be able to cut their costs ?



 You seem to be getting things out of context by diverting attention away from the real issue which was about the loss of coal fired power stations and who finally pays for that loss.

On the subject of tax cuts to business it was good policy when Keating reduced the tax burden on business and in recent times it has been supported by Chris Bowen and Bill Shorten.

I would still like to see some facts and figures to back your argument on state owned coal fired power stations running at a loss without diverting to some other issue......But I won't hold my breath waiting.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 January 2017)

noco said:


> I would still like to see some facts and figures to back your argument on state owned coal fired power stations running at a loss without diverting to some other issue......But I won't hold my breath waiting.




What figures do you want ? Lots of government services run at a loss which we pay for with things called taxes. We pay taxes to have these services available when we need them.


----------



## noco (16 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Conversion efficiency is not the only factor to consider with power generation. Cost of coal + transportation >> cost of wind or sunlight. As for subsidies, coal has been subsidised for decades.




And Danial Andrews tripled the royalties on coal last year to make Hazelwood even less viable.

You have still not answered my question.....Who pays for the loss of running a coal fired power station and I need to see some facts and figures from you back up what you were stating in your post # 1523.
No diversion this time.

Facts and figures please.


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2017)

noco said:


> And Danial Andrews tripled the royalties on coal last year to make Hazelwood even less viable.
> 
> You have still not answered my question.....Who pays for the loss of running a coal fired power station and I need to see some facts and figures from you back up what you were stating in your post # 1523.
> No diversion this time.
> ...




But the royalty rates are only slightly more than QLD and less than NSW and only $60m/annum increase shared by all coal fired operators in Vic, so how does $15m/annum  cripple a major power station that hasn't been maintained to last past the present because it's a dog technology, the owners themselves have identified as surplus to their needs to turn a profit elsewhere with newer first world directions.


----------



## Tisme (17 January 2017)

50,000 fulltime jobs lost under Malcolm's watch last year. Natural born economic managers?


----------



## SirRumpole (17 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> 50,000 fulltime jobs lost under Malcolm's watch last year. Natural born economic managers?




It's due to those darn Lefties blocking all his important reforms.


----------



## Tisme (17 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> It's due to those darn Lefties blocking all his important reforms.




It's only a tad after 7am and you are already into bashing socialists, commies,....what's that other group..dammit can't think of it....


----------



## SirRumpole (17 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> It's only a tad after 7am and you are already into bashing socialists, commies,....what's that other group..dammit can't think of it....




I'll have to give you the win. **** lasted longer than I thought.


----------



## Tisme (17 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I'll have to give you the win. **** lasted longer than I thought.




That's the trouble with third party people like you .... too much faith in midi-chlorians (aka goodness of gut instinct).


----------



## noco (17 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> It's due to those darn Lefties blocking all his important reforms.




OMG...You have really seen the light of day...I am proud of your confession and it is so true.


----------



## explod (17 January 2017)

> Turnbull now tries to escape into the TPP debate to dodge accountability for the behaviour of his criminal syndicate.
> 
> Not a good idea!
> 
> ...




Just someones opinion of course.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 January 2017)

It's a lot easier to crack down on pensioners and the disabled than high income tax avoiders.

Bastards.



> *Centrelink's controversial data matching program to target pensioners and disabled, Labor calls for suspension*
> 
> The Federal Government will expand Centrelink's automatic debt recovery program later this year to focus on aged pensioners and disability support payments.
> 
> ...


----------



## explod (17 January 2017)

noco said:


> OMG...You have really seen the light of day...I am proud of your confession and it is so true.



Lets get down to identifying the lefties within the general community noco.  Who are they in your view ? and I am not referring to unions or political parties but examples of ordinary people living amonst us and on the street.  It is time for actual nuts and bolts Ole Pal.


----------



## noco (17 January 2017)

explod said:


> Lets get down to identifying the lefties within the general community noco.  Who are they in your view ? and I am not referring to unions or political parties but examples of ordinary people living amonst us and on the street.  It is time for actual nuts and bolts Ole Pal.




Why do I have to identify the lefties?...For all I know one could be living next door to me.

I just congratulated Sir Rumpole  for realizing the lefties were holding important cost savings in the senate.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 January 2017)

noco said:


> I just congratulated Sir Rumpole for realizing the lefties were holding important cost savings in the senate.




Look up the word 'sarcasm' sometime.


----------



## noco (17 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Look up the word 'sarcasm' sometime.




I am sorry Rumpy, I really took you seriously but now I realize you where only foolin'....I don't see were sarcasm fits in here under those circumstances.

Perhaps should have been honest in the first place so there could not have been any misunderstanding.


----------



## PZ99 (18 January 2017)

Pauline Hanson wants Malcolm Turnbull to bring Tony Abbott back to the cabinet as health minister (as he was in the Howard Govt) to replace Sussan Ley. Thoughts?
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...o-bring-tony-abbott-back-20170117-gtta24.html


----------



## SirRumpole (18 January 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Pauline Hanson wants Malcolm Turnbull to bring Tony Abbott back to the cabinet as health minister (as he was in the Howard Govt) to replace Sussan Ley. Thoughts?
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...o-bring-tony-abbott-back-20170117-gtta24.html




Abbott is the one who approved the $7 co payment which was one of the factors that nearly lost them government. Abbott may be popular with the Far Right, but he certainly isn't popular with the public, so having him a Minister in such a sensitive portfolio would be a mistake electorally speaking.

He may do OK in Indigenous affairs or another portfolio that the public don't worry too much about.


----------



## PZ99 (18 January 2017)

Good point about Indigenous affairs. Tony did previously indicate interest for that position.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ose-friend-cate-mcgregor-20161031-gsf1ec.html


----------



## noco (18 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Abbott is the one who approved the $7 co payment which was one of the factors that nearly lost them government. Abbott may be popular with the Far Right, but he certainly isn't popular with the public, so having him a Minister in such a sensitive portfolio would be a mistake electorally speaking.
> 
> He may do OK in Indigenous affairs or another portfolio that the public don't worry too much about.




I don't believe Tony Abbott his back bench seat...There is too much animosity between he and Turnbull.

As far as the $7 co payment, I do believe you have mentioned that on many occasions in the past, so I do not know why you keep bringing it up....I could respond with Labor's misdoings but does not add to sensible debate.


----------



## PZ99 (18 January 2017)

It's gone to Greg Hunt > http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-18/greg-hunt-replaces-sussan-ley-as-health-minister/8190384


----------



## Tisme (18 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Abbott  *Credlin* is the one who approved the $7 co payment which was one of the factors that nearly lost them government. Abbott may be popular with the Far Right, but he certainly isn't popular with the public, so having him a Minister in such a sensitive portfolio would be a mistake electorally speaking.
> 
> He may do OK in Indigenous affairs or another portfolio that the public don't worry too much about
> .




Corrected for accuracy?


----------



## sptrawler (18 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Abbott may be popular with the Far Right, but he certainly isn't popular with the public,




No one knows that he isn't popular with the public, the media said he wasn't popular, like they said Trump wasn't popular.

The Labor Party followers didn't like him, but they did like Turnbull, now they don't like him.

This is the problem in Australia, the media and the vocal minorities, have way too much say.

That is exactly why Hanson will do well, the silent majority have no one else to vote for. I believe Abbott would do far better at the poll than Turnbull or Shorten.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 January 2017)

Negative gearing must go.



_*"Sydney's housing has been rated less affordable than global metropolises New York and London in a new survey that paints a dire picture for the city's middle-income earners."*_



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-...ability-nightmare-laid-bare-in-survey/8206676


----------



## McLovin (24 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Negative gearing must go.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




On the flip side, having lived in both London and New York, the size of housing in Australia is enormous compared to the shoe boxes in those cities. My eastern suburbs terrace which is of average size (3 bedder/2bath) would be considered huge in London and probably cost double or more given the proximity to the CBD.

I'm not making light of the lack of affordable housing it's a huge issue for people my age (35), just putting things in a bit of perspective.


----------



## pixel (24 January 2017)

McLovin said:


> I'm not making light of the lack of affordable housing it's a huge issue for people my age (35), just putting things in a bit of perspective.



For people in my age group (65+) affordability was measured against basic *needs*, not luxury *wants*. But today, nobody is buying entry-level 2-bed, 1-bath fibro homes anymore. Most of them have been bulldozed and replaced by Tuscan-style boxes or high-rise blocks with all the trimmings. They may look new and _en vogue_, but are way above an entrant's *needs*.
just my 2c worth of thoughts


----------



## PZ99 (24 January 2017)

McLovin said:


> On the flip side, having lived in both London and New York, the size of housing in Australia is enormous compared to the shoe boxes in those cities. My eastern suburbs terrace which is of average size (3 bedder/2bath) would be considered huge in London and probably cost double or more given the proximity to the CBD.
> 
> I'm not making light of the lack of affordable housing it's a huge issue for people my age (35), just putting things in a bit of perspective.



It's a good point although when it comes to new estates I mostly blame councils for having covenants that force developers to build larger houses than what many people might require. In any case, it's the value of the land itself that's getting blown out of proportion which is why I agree with the idea of winding back negative gearing... if it's done gradually.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 January 2017)

pixel said:


> For people in my age group (65+) affordability was measured against basic *needs*, not luxury *wants*. But today, nobody is buying entry-level 2-bed, 1-bath fibro homes anymore. Most of them have been bulldozed and replaced by Tuscan-style boxes or high-rise blocks with all the trimmings. They may look new and _en vogue_, but are way above an entrant's *needs*.
> just my 2c worth of thoughts




Very true, especially in a suburb of Melbourne of which I'm familiar. Old houses bought by Chinese (mostly), huge mansions erected and suddenly you have $2 million houses in suburbs where families used to be bought up in modest housing.


----------



## McLovin (25 January 2017)

pixel said:


> For people in my age group (65+) affordability was measured against basic *needs*, not luxury *wants*. But today, nobody is buying entry-level 2-bed, 1-bath fibro homes anymore. Most of them have been bulldozed and replaced by Tuscan-style boxes or high-rise blocks with all the trimmings. They may look new and _en vogue_, but are way above an entrant's *needs*.
> just my 2c worth of thoughts




The price of land does not lend itself to first home buyers building 2 bed fibro boxes. That's why they're buying apartments, or renting.


----------



## explod (25 January 2017)

Somehow we are going to have to storm Parliament when it resumes and ensure that some common decency towards all of our people is restored.  The following is an open letter from Centrelink Staff:



> CPSU - Community and Public Sector Union
> 11 hrs ·
> 
> 
> ...




*Australian Unemployed Workers' Union shared CPSU - Community and Public Sector Union's photo.*
3 hrs ·


----------



## noco (25 January 2017)

explod said:


> Somehow we are going to have to storm Parliament when it resumes and ensure that some common decency towards all of our people is restored.  The following is an open letter from Centrelink Staff:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Looks like some Fabian violence is in the wind.


----------



## Smurf1976 (25 January 2017)

noco said:


> They are just as bad and that is why we need a revolution in politics....While we have these two useless major parties, the country is going no where......It is going backwards.




Agreed there.

I really don't think that in 2017 either of the two major parties have a coherent plan for the future. On a few individual issues maybe but not overall.

It's not like in the past when we had, for example, Keating versus Hewson battling it out with serious debate over the GST which had the public engaged. Compare the public debate over the GST when Hewson proposed it versus modern politics and there's a world of difference and not for the better.

I'm by no means a Greens supporter but in the past I held considerable respect for them actually standing up for what they said they'd stand up for. I may not have agreed on the details, but certainly in the early days they did do what they said they'd do - credit where it's due. Unfortunately in more recent times the Greens seem to have become just another party not much different to any of the others.

We desperately need change that's for sure.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 January 2017)

Smurf1976 said:


> We desperately need change that's for sure.




I'm reminded of the old saying, "be careful what you wish for, you might get it".

If the change is to loonies like Hanson, then we are likely to be worse off than we are now.

I guess the best way is for the polls to say that there will be a massive swing to a minor party which will force a leadership change in the major parties, and then we may once again get some quality leadership in the majors who are worth voting for.

Who they may be I have no idea at this stage, the Conservatives are woeful , even more so if they go back to Abbott or one of his acolytes.

Labor has a few young guns, Bowen, Jason Clare, Mark Butler and Albo. Whether they are ready is debatable at this point.


----------



## noco (25 January 2017)

I have sent 3 emails to Turnbull this week......The first was accepted.... the latter two were returned as mail undeliverable.....He obviously has closed his email account in embarrassment.

I asked him to resign on both occasions.

Peter Costello warned the Liberal Party back in 2008 that he would destroy the Liberal Party.

I would say he (Turnbull) is working with Bill Shorten because both have the same idea to send Australia down the gurgler.

What the hell is this great country  of ours coming to with all the crap that is going on.

Where is that rising star we are all hoping for?

https://www.facebook.com/politicsag...241439020260/1107566909354373/?type=3&theater


----------



## PZ99 (26 January 2017)

Agenda 21.... what a dead giveaway as to their political intentions 

Tony Abbott is the one destroying the Liberal Party. Malcolm Turnbull won the election that Tony Abbott would have lost. Tony lost 9% in his own seat... Turnbull even had to spend $2mill of his own money to get the party over the line > more here > this story is a real doozy! Ever since that day the divided Liberal Party has been at civil war hence their current polling.

Can't wait to see Tony Abbott's bust in the Prime Ministers Avenue so I can use it as an avatar 

People seem to have forgotten why the Liberal Party spilled Abbott's leadership twice because of his incompetency as leader. The funny thing is the first whiff of Tony Abbott being leader started with a clown by the name of Wilson Tuckey... say no more. Abbott is a hilarious fake who doesn't have what it takes to do that job and he knows it better than anyone. Even Cory Bernardi has woken up to what kind of dill Tony Abbott is.

I really do hope Cory Bernardi does the Don Chipp thing and starts his own breakaway Conservative party and perhaps merge with One Nation and become a viable third party.
The Liberal Party can divest itself from the right and return to their colloquial "sensible centre".

The dilution would cause the Coaliton to break up leaving us with 3 or maybe 4 parties with a real chance of winning an election. Labor would then be forced to revert to their roots as a progressive workers' party instead of a neo-liberalistic capitalist wanabee.

Bring it on I say


----------



## SirRumpole (28 January 2017)

Some Liberals are starting to see the light on negative gearing, but Morrison is still locked in the dark ages, controlled by the privileged few.

*Negative gearing: Scott Morrison rejects fresh calls to change policy*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-...ernments-negative-gearing-policy-firm/8219608


----------



## Tisme (28 January 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Some Liberals are starting to see the light on negative gearing, but Morrison is still locked in the dark ages, controlled by the privileged few.
> 
> *Negative gearing: Scott Morrison rejects fresh calls to change policy*
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-...ernments-negative-gearing-policy-firm/8219608





I think that decision is a strong indicator of a susceptible economy, with  GDP  propped up by property prices.


----------



## Tisme (30 January 2017)

Malcolm should be happy this week with the latest trade figures tipped to show a surplus due to Chinese upswing in coal and iron ore purchases.

Lets hope he banks the free ride we are getting this year from China


----------



## SirRumpole (1 February 2017)

Why we should tear up Free Trade Agreements.

*Trans-Pacific Partnership: Turnbull Government policy consistency would not go astray after US tore up trade deal*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-...olicy-consistency-turnbull-government/8221684


----------



## PZ99 (1 February 2017)

*Workers miss out due to high business tax: PM*

MALCOLM Turnbull will pledge to put an extra $750 in the pockets of average Aussies every year at his first big speech of the year.

The Prime Minister is expected to turn up the heat on Labor over its opposition to his government’s $50 billion worth of business tax cuts when he addresses the National Press Club.

He will say that if the business tax rate was cut to 25 per cent, fulltime workers on average weekly earnings would have an extra $750 in their pockets each and every year.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/mone...m/news-story/bd0f07a3f88c2fd1b770e4744e38b24e

Standard Liberal faulty logic at play here. Your employer has more money therefore your wages go up? No way fellas. It just means higher profits for the owners/shareholders... all sponsored by the taxpayers with a balance sheet of negative $300 billion and growing 
Abolishing payroll tax (states) would make more sense, yes?


----------



## SirRumpole (1 February 2017)

> Standard Liberal faulty logic at play here. Your employer has more money therefore your wages go up? No way fellas. It just means higher profits for the owners/shareholders... all sponsored by the taxpayers with a balance sheet of negative $300 billion and growing




Quite right. Give the tax cuts to the consumers who will spend it and put it back into the economy and we will all be better off.


----------



## noco (1 February 2017)

PZ99 said:


> *Workers miss out due to high business tax: PM*
> 
> MALCOLM Turnbull will pledge to put an extra $750 in the pockets of average Aussies every year at his first big speech of the year.
> 
> ...




Some companies have a scheme where employees can become involved with allotment of shares payable from their wages....I know of a person who was involved in such a scheme with the company she worked for and then instead of taking a dividend every 6 months she was allotted more shares which accumulated over time.

But apart from that scheme, an employee can purchase shares in the company he/she works for on the open market.


----------



## Tisme (1 February 2017)

So I'm guessing closed, secret squirrel conversations, which apparently is what friends do, haven't worked so well with the Manus swap deal.

I would suggest Trump is a fair weather friend at best and perhaps an open dialogue by our PM would be more in the interests of our nation.


----------



## Tisme (1 February 2017)

Change again for Manus concentration camp, Trump now standing by agreement .... for now


----------



## luutzu (1 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> See I would have said a NOCO is a fella who is denial about his true hardcore socialistic bent, but has a hard time coming out of the closet on the issue. As a real right winger I can spot tarnished pewter trying to be polished sterling silver a mile off, troll or no troll. Denial is  not just a river in Egypt.




Denial is not a river in Egypt. But The Nile is. You welcome


----------



## Tisme (1 February 2017)

luutzu said:


> Denial is not a river in Egypt. But The Nile is. You welcome




Hmmm not into puns luutzu?

I think this one dates back to Mark Twain's use, although like many of his attributed quotes they probably came from someone else.


----------



## luutzu (1 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Hmmm not into puns luutzu?
> 
> I think this one dates back to Mark Twain's use, although like many of his attributed quotes they probably came from someone else.




Different when it's vocalised and when it's written McGee.

"Denial is not just a river in Egypt". Well, there's no river Denial in Egypt.

But if you write "The Nile is not just a river in Egypt", they can't argue that there is no river The Nile, but your pun of _denial _get through when it's read.

Cool?


----------



## PZ99 (1 February 2017)

*Turnbull Liberal donation remains secret*

Malcolm Turnbull's personal donation to the Liberal Party during last year's federal election won't be known for another year. The Australian Electoral Commission on Wednesday released the political funding disclosures for the 2015/16 financial year. However, Mr Turnbull's donation - rumoured to be around $1 million - to a cash-strapped Liberal party during the campaign was not in the figures. A spokesman for the prime minister said the donation would be declared within the rules by the Liberal party organisation.

http://www.news.com.au/national/bre...t/news-story/aa151a8cf9f1360b0f9743ad2333d1e3

How secret? $2 million dollars is my bet. You read it here first. LOL


----------



## PZ99 (1 February 2017)

Didn't take long did it? "Another year" became one day... $1.75mill

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-...ing-1.75-million-to-election-campaign/8233244


----------



## Tisme (1 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Change again for Manus concentration camp, Trump now standing by agreement .... for now




Whoops, hold off, Trump hasn't made a decision yet


----------



## sptrawler (1 February 2017)

Well I suppose Turnbull putting his own money up, is better than Labor, putting unionists money up.lol
If that happens


----------



## sptrawler (1 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Whoops, hold off, Trump hasn't made a decision yet



No he has probably been told, we are the only friends they have, in this part of the World.lol


----------



## PZ99 (1 February 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Well I suppose Turnbull putting his own money up, is better than Labor, putting unionists money up.lol
> If that happens



I agree. I have no problem with Turnbull funding his own campaign. Just don't see the point of the secrecy. Maybe it's media beat up 

What it does highlight though is the Liberal Party almost sent itself broke to win the election because donations had plummeted due to a backlash over the leadership change.

I think Turnbull did the right thing. If he didn't then Shorten would be PM by now.


----------



## sptrawler (1 February 2017)

PZ99 said:


> I agree. I have no problem with Turnbull funding his own campaign. Just don't see the point of the secrecy. Maybe it's media beat up
> 
> What it does highlight though is the Liberal Party almost sent itself broke to win the election because donations had plummeted due to a backlash over the leadership change.
> 
> I think Turnbull did the right thing. If he didn't then Shorten would be PM by now.




That scenario, is scary, I'm not happy with Turnbull but Shorten would IMO be horrendous.


----------



## bellenuit (2 February 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Well I suppose Turnbull putting his own money up, is better than Labor, putting unionists money up.lol
> If that happens




I haven't paid much attention to unions' "goings on" in recent years, but wasn't it the case in the past that a Labor Government would provide grants to unions for cultural activities or education of sorts that never really got used, but was then funnelled back to the Labor Party as union contributions to their electoral campaigns. So the reality was the public were actually indirectly funding the Labor Party. This is not to say that there isn't some sort of reciprocal agreement between the Libs and big business that does more or less the same thing.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 February 2017)

bellenuit said:


> This is not to say that there isn't some sort of reciprocal agreement between the Libs and big business that does more or less the same thing.




You haven't heard of Parakeelia ?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-23/bradley-explained:-the-liberal-partys-parakeelia-rort/7535372


----------



## SirRumpole (2 February 2017)

sptrawler said:


> but Shorten would IMO be horrendous.




The Righties keep saying that Shorten would be disastrous but they rarely say why.

Unless reasons are given we can only assume that these statements are ingrained bias without foundation.


----------



## sptrawler (2 February 2017)

Shorten IMO, is too tied up with the unions, this leads to a situation where a small minority have a disproportionate say in politics.
That situation already exists in the Senate, add to that the unions controlling the house of Reps, and IMO it is a recipe for disaster.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 February 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Shorten IMO, is too tied up with the unions, this leads to a situation where a small minority have a disproportionate say in politics.
> That situation already exists in the Senate, add to that the unions controlling the house of Reps, and IMO it is a recipe for disaster.




You could equally say that Turnbull is too tied up with  business leading to the giving away of billions of our money in corporate tax cuts that won't produce any benefits for decades as Turnbull admitted on 7:30, when we have budget deficit that his government doubled and that that they made such a fuss about when Labor was in power.

Now that is a recipe for debt and deficit disaster.


----------



## overhang (2 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> You haven't heard of Parakeelia ?
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-23/bradley-explained:-the-liberal-partys-parakeelia-rort/7535372



People are barking up the wrong tree, worried about Turnbull donating his own money when the Parakeelia is used to launder tax payer money to the Libs.  How is it reasonable to award government contracts to a company owned by the Liberal party that then funnels most of that money back into the Liberal party via donations.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 February 2017)

overhang said:


> People are barking up the wrong tree, worried about Turnbull donating his own money when the Parakeelia is used to launder tax payer money to the Libs.  How is it reasonable to award government contracts to a company owned by the Liberal party that then funnels most of that money back into the Liberal party via donations.




True. I'm not a Liberal Party supporter but I'm not really worried about Turnbull donating his own own money. I would be worried if other wealthy individuals donated large sums to buy influence, but we know what Turnbull stands for and we can vote for him or not.

Parakeelia was a scam, pure and simple and that sort of thing should be trodden on whether perpetrated by Liberal or Labor, but Parakeelia despite all the publicity is probably still operating today, but the fuss over it has died down.


----------



## sptrawler (2 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> You could equally say that Turnbull is too tied up with  business leading to the giving away of billions of our money in corporate tax cuts that won't produce any benefits for decades as Turnbull admitted on 7:30, when we have budget deficit that his government doubled and that that they made such a fuss about when Labor was in power.
> 
> Now that is a recipe for debt and deficit disaster.




The difference is, companies give to both side of politics, you are implying they only give to the Libs. The companies, will and do fund both parties, in the hope of favourable outcomes whichever party gains office.

With regard to the unions, they give members money to one side of politics without the members permission, in return for this, they have disproportionate say in the process.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 February 2017)

sptrawler said:


> The difference is, companies give to both side of politics, you are implying they only give to the Libs. The companies, will and do fund both parties, in the hope of favourable outcomes whichever party gains office.
> 
> With regard to the unions, they give members money to one side of politics without the members permission, in return for this, they have disproportionate say in the process.




It's still payment for influence. I'd be quite happy if political donations from both unions and business were banned as neither of them are eligible to vote.


----------



## PZ99 (2 February 2017)

Bill Shorten has a habit of destroying prime ministers... Rudd, Gillard, Abbott.
And on 7:30 Turnbull indirectly accused Bill Shorten of costing him $1.75m of his own money.

That's what you call pushing a friendship


----------



## noco (2 February 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Shorten IMO, is too tied up with the unions, this leads to a situation where a small minority have a disproportionate say in politics.
> That situation already exists in the Senate, add to that the unions controlling the house of Reps, and IMO it is a recipe for disaster.




Shorten is also a Fabian (socialist) and believes in central control.....Free enterprise and profits are a dirty word with Shorten......He is also a puppet for the CFMEU...They are his masters.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 February 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Bill Shorten has a habit of destroying prime ministers... Rudd, Gillard, Abbott.
> And on 7:30 Turnbull indirectly accused Bill Shorten of costing him $1.75m of his own money.
> 
> That's what you call pushing a friendship




Yep, Li'l ol' wrecking ball Bill.


----------



## overhang (2 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> It's still payment for influence. I'd be quite happy if political donations from both unions and business were banned as neither of them are eligible to vote.



Fully agree I'd like donations from those means to be banned.  Businesses and unions don't donate money from the good of their heart, they want to buy influence in some form or another.  Whilst we still have donations from these means then I would much rather a PM that donates his own money than coming from 3rd parties.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 February 2017)

So much for our Prime Minister's ability to handle Donald Trump.

*Donald Trump told Malcolm Turnbull their phone call was 'worst by far': report*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-02/donald-trump-shared-worst-call-with-malcolm-turnbull/8234904


----------



## pixel (2 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Donald Trump told Malcolm Turnbull their phone call was 'worst by far': report



That's the new Global Diplomacy "among friends"


----------



## SirRumpole (2 February 2017)

Let's not bother with phone calls anymore, all decisions will be announced on Twitter.


----------



## Tisme (2 February 2017)

pixel said:


> That's the new Global Diplomacy "among friends"



If it was an ALP PM, Newscorp would be splashing Labor spit and vitriol on page one with followup on 2 &3.

I blame Bill Shorten for this...as will the Liberal Party


----------



## SirRumpole (2 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> If it was an ALP PM, Newscorp would be splashing Labor spit and vitriol on page one with followup on 2 &3.
> 
> I blame Bill Shorten for this...as will the Liberal Party




Yes it's all Bill's fault. He should never have made the refugee deal in the first place.


----------



## sptrawler (2 February 2017)

All you should blame Bill for, is the inability to say nothing, until you have the facts.


----------



## Tisme (3 February 2017)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...0e57e57e05d_story.html?utm_term=.ecd18d38fdc5

Interesting show of strength by Malcolm


----------



## Tisme (3 February 2017)

Dithering PM


----------



## Tisme (3 February 2017)

Malcolm live on ABC tv now with John Laws....... it's all Labor's fault that the live people exports are hitting an hurdle with Trump.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Malcolm live on ABC tv now with John Laws....... it's all Labor's fault that the live people exports are hitting an hurdle with Trump.




Tell us something new.


----------



## PZ99 (3 February 2017)

Well they did ban live cattle exports. Maybe Turnbull can't tell the difference? lol


----------



## Tisme (6 February 2017)

The Libs are in panic mode.

Scott Morrison is trying to paint Shorten and the ALP as political "hacks". That renewables are a Labor plot.

Unlike every other govt that built Australia's industry and economy, he's not going to leave future generations with a bill for the capital works they will enjoy the benefits of.

This is the same mob that were economic managers and going to fix everything...instead we have an insipid PM and a huge growing debt = due in major part to pork barrelling their support base.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> The Libs are in panic mode.
> 
> Scott Morrison is trying to paint Shorten and the ALP as political "hacks". That renewables are a Labor plot.
> 
> ...




Are you glad you didn't run for them after all  ?


----------



## Tisme (6 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Are you glad you didn't run for them after all  ?




I might throw my hat in the ring afterall LOL They tried it on with my daughter recently...she's a Y/Millenial gen so the response was respectful with many compendium uses of "f%4k" and "off".

The majors just don't understand the new voter block that is eroding the X gen's grip on social engineering  The baby boomers and millenials are unwittingly joining up and voting for a move away from the enthusiasm sucking LNP and ALP oligopoly.

I'm just the fella who can deliver. LOL


----------



## overhang (6 February 2017)

The horrible legacy of the Abbott era lives on


> The Abbott government bungled its overhaul of billions of dollars worth of Indigenous funding, a major report has found.






> The Government initially earmarked $4.8 billion for the IAS over four years.
> 
> The report said the strategy was announced in May 2014 and was designed over just seven weeks.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-03/abbott-government-bungled-indigenous-funding-overhaul/8238822

This myth that the Liberals are better economic mangers must end.


----------



## noco (6 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Tell us something new.




Turnbull and Shorten are in bed together to convert Australia into a socialist republic...They will have to fight each other over who wants to be President...
Now that is something new to chew over.


----------



## ianna (6 February 2017)

The title 'The Turnbull Government' seems to imply that Turnbull has control over the government.  I think of him as someone who wanted to be the driver but has found himself behind the wheel of a vehicle with no brakes or steering that is gathering speed down a steep slope.


----------



## noco (6 February 2017)

ianna said:


> The title 'The Turnbull Government' seems to imply that Turnbull has control over the government.  I think of him as someone who wanted to be the driver but has found himself behind the wheel of a vehicle with no brakes or steering that is gathering speed down a steep slope.



Yes..that sums Turnbull up in one....He should resign and if he doesn't then he will be pushed out by the political revolution which has already begun.


----------



## Logique (6 February 2017)

I think we have a few of each of these political tribes in here, there's an online test at the link if you're unsure


> FEBRUARY 6 2017 -
> *What type of Aussie are you? Meet the 7 new political tribes
> http://www.smh.com.au/national/what...ew-political-tribes-20170203-gu57b2.html#Meet the 7 tribes*
> By: Conal Hanna, Inga Ting, Matt Wade
> ...


----------



## Valued (6 February 2017)

Logique said:


> I think we have a few of each of these political tribes in here, there's an online test at the link if you're unsure




I did it and apparently I am an "Ambitious Saver". Hard to argue with wanting to get ahead, wanting financial security and being career-minded. Sounds reasonable to me.


----------



## sptrawler (6 February 2017)

I did it and the same as you, was classed as an ambitious saver, closely followed by "anti establishment firebrand".lol


----------



## PZ99 (7 February 2017)

*Malcolm Turnbull axes Life Gold Pass, angering MPs > news dart calm*

Good move! Only the pigs with their snouts in the trough are unhappy. LOL


----------



## ianna (7 February 2017)

Good to see one of the outrageous perks ended.  Perhaps a bit harsh to wipe out the free travel completely.  I'd be happy for them to receive a free bus pass.  Help them keep in touch with folk they are supposed to represent.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 February 2017)

ianna said:


> Good to see one of the outrageous perks ended.  Perhaps a bit harsh to wipe out the free travel completely.  I'd be happy for them to receive a free bus pass.  Help them keep in touch with folk they are supposed to represent.




The Gold Pass is for retired politicians so they don't really give a stuff about anyone else now.


----------



## Tisme (8 February 2017)

Malcolm must be feeling the pressure, because he just went down in the gutter and got personal with Billy Boy, with invective. Good stuff for rednecked liberals, but hardly becoming of a leader.

If only he would take my advice and learn Keating speak; it's not like I haven't told him many times


----------



## PZ99 (8 February 2017)

Yep. Similar attack during the 7:30 interview. Turnbull is taking aim at the true source of his grief of loosing donating three times his annual PM salary just to keep his job at the last election. It was a very expensive Electricity Bill


----------



## SirRumpole (8 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Malcolm must be feeling the pressure, because he just went down in the gutter and got personal with Billy Boy, with invective. Good stuff for rednecked liberals, but hardly becoming of a leader.
> 
> If only he would take my advice and learn Keating speak; it's not like I haven't told him many times




Pretty disgusting really, as Turnbull played with Kerry Packer's crystal to get where he is today.


----------



## noco (8 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Malcolm must be feeling the pressure, because he just went down in the gutter and got personal with Billy Boy, with invective. Good stuff for rednecked liberals, but hardly becoming of a leader.
> 
> If only he would take my advice and learn Keating speak; it's not like I haven't told him many times



Shorten was just getting a bit of his own medicine.


----------



## Tisme (8 February 2017)

noco said:


> Shorten was just getting a bit of his own medicine.




 A battle of mediocre


----------



## sptrawler (9 February 2017)

Jeez Tisme and Sir Rumpole, you wanted Turnbull and now you have him all you want to do is bag him.

Noco didn't want him, and now all you want to do, is bag noco for Turnbulls faults.

It would appear, you two really don't know what you want, you just seem to be happy bagging anyone that isn't Labor.lol


----------



## wayneL (9 February 2017)

I thought it was great... dead accurate.

About time Malcolm got fired up.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 February 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Jeez Tisme and Sir Rumpole, you wanted Turnbull and now you have him all you want to do is bag him.




When he deserves it. 

He and his mates are parasites sucking the life out of people trying to buy a house with their negative gearing rort.

Absolute hypocrisy to bag Shorten for being a moderate union leader..


----------



## Tisme (9 February 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Jeez Tisme and Sir Rumpole, you wanted Turnbull and now you have him all you want to do is bag him.
> 
> Noco didn't want him, and now all you want to do, is bag noco for Turnbulls faults.
> 
> It would appear, you two really don't know what you want, you just seem to be happy bagging anyone that isn't Labor.lol





I think you will find I have always considered him a ditherer  (I used to call him variously a hollow man or Chauncey Gardiner). It's been an ongoing argument I have had with Rumpole since well before I came to this board. So no, you are wrong in your statements, which just goes to show how messages can get garbled when predisposed to personal bias.


----------



## Tisme (9 February 2017)

wayneL said:


> I thought it was great... dead accurate.
> 
> About time Malcolm got fired up.




I think this is the agenda this year: to play the man instead of the policy. Very Abbottesque, but requires a certain amount of ingrained hate, which means Malcolm is not going to be the man his wife married at the end of it.


----------



## Tisme (9 February 2017)

So the boss of the Post Office has decided to donate several million of his outrageous income to an offshore Muslim museum to show how gracious he is.

What I want to know is who in govt allowed his wage to double in six years, why he got that amount of money in the first place and why hasn't it been flagged on annual audit before?

Be interesting to see how much the other executives and board members get....????


----------



## SirRumpole (9 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> So the boss of the Post Office has decided to donate several million of his outrageous income to an offshore Muslim museum to show how gracious he is.
> 
> What I want to know is who in govt allowed his wage to double in six years, why he got that amount of money in the first place and why hasn't it been flagged on annual audit before?
> 
> Be interesting to see how much the other executives and board members get....????




The CEO gets $5 million of a profit of $36 million.

That's a pretty fair slice of a pretty slim profit.


----------



## Tisme (9 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> When he deserves it.
> 
> He and his mates are parasites sucking the life out of people trying to buy a house with their negative gearing rort.
> 
> Absolute hypocrisy to bag Shorten for being a moderate union leader..




Tony (and Billy) was rather smug don't you think LOL. He knows this is potentially the death roll year for Turnbull

Peta Credlin dreamed up a "Mr Harbourside Mansion" back last year when Malcolm walk around working class Penrith went pear shaped and he ran for shelter from the media.

This kind of outburst will haunt him in later years and it's not a good idea to be calling into question the character and calibre of the Melbourne money set and by implication the family of Bill's wife.

I actually watched the whole thing live and I wanted to put the boot into Billy just to shut him up. Malcolm could have had a bigger win by just ignoring it with a WTF hand gesture and going to the vote.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> This kind of outburst will haunt him in later years and it's not a good idea to be calling into question the character and calibre of the Melbourne money set and by implication the family of Bill's wife.




Political invective appeals to the Party Faithfull, but it puts everyone else offside. Keating was probably brought down in the end because of his lack of statesmanship towards his rivals.

So I think "Mr Harbourside Mansion" probably resonates more with the public than Turnbull's outburst, because it was one of the Liberal Party machine that first coined it.

Question Time might be worth watching today.


----------



## PZ99 (9 February 2017)

Labor strategists must have seen Turnbull's very similar outburst on 7:30 and used it as a cattle prod... they got him where it hurts and it works. Otherwise there seemed little point in moving a motion against the Govt in parliament.

It worked for Abbott - he did it 75 times in 3 years.


----------



## Logique (9 February 2017)

Blogger _SpencerofBrisbane_ has reviewed the Coalition leadership options. My view? Might have to look further afield.  I don't know how the national treasury would keep the frocks up to a PM Bishop.


> SpencerofBrisbane
> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...e/news-story/eb9e987c39fd77c50ff598e1d1c89aca
> 
> Bishop ?  She's a value-free zone inclined to go Left. I'd never vote for her.
> ...


----------



## Tisme (9 February 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Labor strategists must have seen Turnbull's very similar outburst on 7:30 and used it as a cattle prod... they got him where it hurts and it works. Otherwise there seemed little point in moving a motion against the Govt in parliament.
> 
> It worked for Abbott - he did it 75 times in 3 years.




Now he has to own Credlin's insult forever LOL

I can imagine every hand he shakes from now on will be connected to a thought bubble:  "Mr Harbourside Mansion" smirk.


----------



## PZ99 (9 February 2017)

Logique said:


> Blogger SpencerofBrisbane has reviewed the Coalition leadership options. My view? Might have to look further afield.  I don't know how the national treasury would keep the frocks up to a PM Bishop.








Her name is Julie, she was a showgirl
But that was thirty years ago, when Liberals used to have a show
Now it's a disco, but not for Julie
Still in dress she used to wear
Faded feathers in her hair
She sits there so refined, and drinks herself half-blind
She lost her Brendon and she lost her Tony
Now she's lost her mind


----------



## Tisme (9 February 2017)

If these two were part of your immediate family how red would your face be? LOL 

Even Mr Embarassment himself Pyne is crawling into his coat sleeve.


----------



## PZ99 (9 February 2017)

They're still at it too. Shouting like a team of Chelsea supporters when they're 8 points behind.

http://www.news.com.au/national/bre...n/news-story/3b68aec7f6b77e1e97e33ab95284d3da


----------



## Tisme (9 February 2017)

I wonder how Pauline takes to this, being one who sold fish&chips, but didn't run a pie shop:



> Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce thoroughly enjoyed Mr Turnbull’s spray and joined in this morning.
> 
> “(Mr Shorten) couldn’t run a pie shop and the thought of him running the country just fills me with dread,” he told ABC.
> 
> ...


----------



## wayneL (9 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> I think this is the agenda this year: to play the man instead of the policy. Very Abbottesque, but requires a certain amount of ingrained hate, which means Malcolm is not going to be the man his wife married at the end of it.



Its okay for Short 'un to play the man, but not Mal?


----------



## Tisme (9 February 2017)

wayneL said:


> Its okay for Short 'un to play the man, but not Mal?





No. But he isn't the Prime Minister who also took a beating from Trump and his own ex Senator.

I don't like Shorten and I don't vote Labor, so I don't know what your question is angling at really.


----------



## Tisme (9 February 2017)

Anyone notice how Shorten was devastated by the onslaught? Look at the anguish on his face : LOL

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-08/turnbull-and-shorten-trade-barbs-during-question-time/8252540


----------



## McLovin (9 February 2017)

wayneL said:


> I thought it was great... dead accurate.
> 
> About time Malcolm got fired up.




We agree for a change.


----------



## pixel (9 February 2017)

*And what did that outburst prove with regard to Labor policies?
In a word: Zilch!*
The PM simply demonstrated that the pressure of trying to lead an incohesive coalition against a hostile Senate is getting the better of him. His repetitive invective went way over the heads of the majority of listeners - assuming there were many to begin with. And the outburst would hardly have persuaded any Labor voter to switch allegiances. That's why Shorten could remain rather calm and poker-faced. No danger from that kind of vitriol.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 February 2017)

pixel said:


> *And what did that outburst prove with regard to Labor policies?
> In a word: Zilch!*
> The PM simply demonstrated that the pressure of trying to lead an incohesive coalition against a hostile Senate is getting the better of him. His repetitive invective went way over the heads of the majority of listeners - assuming there were many to begin with. And the outburst would hardly have persuaded any Labor voter to switch allegiances. That's why Shorten could remain rather calm and poker-faced. No danger from that kind of vitriol.




The Libs still have the stinking fish head policies of negative gearing and corporate tax cuts with little relief for the majority, and in fact less for the majority via reductions in FTB.

Protect the wealthy, hit everyone else like Tories always do.

Unless they change those policies they will lose the next election, Shorten or no Shorten.


----------



## PZ99 (9 February 2017)

LOL @ Tony Abbott 6:50...


----------



## moXJO (11 February 2017)

Tbull wants to do away with the $100 and there was talk of the $50 as well. India just tried something similar and there were massive problems.


----------



## Tisme (11 February 2017)

I have a feeling this author is not impressed:
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...y-against-shorten-just-highlights-his-elitism



> On Friday, Malcolm Turnbull’s tanty at Bill Shorten continued. No doubt encouraged by the rare praise of the newspapers who hyped up his petulant spit on Wednesday as a “withering put down” and an “aggressive new course” from the prime minister, he called his opponent a “hypocrite” on radio.
> 
> But I can’t blame my media colleagues for giving it a go. Here they are in the business of selling newspapers yet all the recent political news from Canberra has less tension than a shrivelled balloon on a damp day.
> 
> It’s a metaphor that defines the very character of the Turnbull government. The Liberals and Nationals have started the new parliamentary year with no national vision, no new policy and no great willingness to face the actual challenges of the global moment...........


----------



## moXJO (11 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> I have a feeling this author is not impressed:
> https://www.theguardian.com/comment...y-against-shorten-just-highlights-his-elitism



She had a dressing down by a conservative after shrieking about feminism, which only made her even more hysterical. At the moment all the right is the enemy of third wave feminists


----------



## Tisme (11 February 2017)

moXJO said:


> She had a dressing down by a conservative after shrieking about feminism, which only made her even more hysterical. At the moment all the right is the enemy of third wave feminists




So she's a " Malcontent" ..boom boom


----------



## Tisme (11 February 2017)




----------



## SirRumpole (11 February 2017)

Barnaby Joyce, the biggest dill in any Parliament in the country.

And they could have voted for  Tony Windsor, what were they thinking ?


----------



## noco (11 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Barnaby Joyce, the biggest dill in any Parliament in the country.
> 
> And they could have voted for  Tony Windsor, what were they thinking ?




They were thinking Tony Windsor was a turncoat who deserted the National Party and could not be trusted.


----------



## pixel (12 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> View attachment 69927



Marie Antoinette's "Let them eat cake!" comes to mind.
She could also have suggested "They should have picked rich parents!"

*Dis-bluddy-gusting*, Mr Harbourside Mansion.


----------



## Tisme (12 February 2017)

noco said:


> They were thinking Tony Windsor was a turncoat who deserted the National Party and could not be trusted.




Yes, but of course if he thought the Nats were no longer credible, with dills who resort to bringing lumps of coal into parliament, then what thinking man could blame him?

Behind all this is probably a woman....you know what woman that would be.


----------



## noco (12 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Yes, but of course if he thought the Nats were no longer credible, with dills who resort to bringing lumps of coal into parliament, then what thinking man could blame him?
> 
> Behind all this is probably a woman....you know what woman that would be.




So then Windsor decided to support comrade Gillard.....The well known communist prime minister.

It turned out to be not a very good choice in the end and that is what has gone against him.


----------



## Tisme (13 February 2017)

noco said:


> So then Windsor decided to support comrade Gillard.....The well known communist prime minister.
> 
> It turned out to be not a very good choice in the end and that is what has gone against him.




He did very well in the vote given the opiate of Hicksville, Barnaby was parachuted in to mollify the discontent of the electorate. Nobody wants to see parliament's clown prince's feelings hurt, he's like that silly cousin that makes family reunions worthwhile.


----------



## Tisme (13 February 2017)

Liar liar pants on fire:
https://mobile.twitter.com/PoliticsFairfax/status/830856277123227648

"Australia Institute executive director Ben Oquist, whose progressive think tank filed the FOI application, said it was regrettable that the government had acted politically despite being cautioned to wait.

"AEMO had told federal public servants and political advisers that renewable energy was not to blame for the blackout. But instead of informing the people of South Australia of this fact, both the Energy Minister and Prime Minister chose to push a false narrative about wind power," he said."


----------



## noco (13 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Liar liar pants on fire:
> https://mobile.twitter.com/PoliticsFairfax/status/830856277123227648
> 
> "Australia Institute executive director Ben Oquist, whose progressive think tank filed the FOI application, said it was regrettable that the government had acted politically despite being cautioned to wait.
> ...




Cherry picking is great until you are found out.

There some 852 new coal fired power stations either planned or under construction in India and China.
Why did you not make mention of them?


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...s/news-story/2110980f03e6ac95fd800c65feb8207d


----------



## Tisme (13 February 2017)

noco said:


> Cherry picking is great until you are found out.
> 
> There some 852 new coal fired power stations either planned or under construction in India and China.
> Why did you not make mention of them?
> ...




I thought you were a born again libertarian and following Pauline? 

You seem to spend an inordinate amount of typing trying to debunk anything of stink that surrounds our government? It's all well and good attacking Shorten for being a bad PM, but guess what ... he's not the PM and Labor is not the govt. When they do take office next election then we can refocus the attack on them for being useless lying t1ts too, but until then it's the LNPs turn for brickbats.

I'm rather concerned you can't break the bonds that bind matey.


----------



## noco (14 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> I thought you were a born again libertarian and following Pauline?
> 
> You seem to spend an inordinate amount of typing trying to debunk anything of stink that surrounds our government? It's all well and good attacking Shorten for being a bad PM, but guess what ... he's not the PM and Labor is not the govt. When they do take office next election then we can refocus the attack on them for being useless lying t1ts too, but until then it's the LNPs turn for brickbats.
> 
> I'm rather concerned you can't break the bonds that bind matey.




What in the hell has your rhetoric got to do with 852 new coal fired power stations or is this your usual conversion away from a sensible answer...I am getting to use to your modus operandi.
Those power plants are being built in China and India and nothing to do with our government.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 February 2017)

noco said:


> What in the hell has your rhetoric got to do with 852 new coal fired power stations or is this your usual conversion away from a sensible answer...I am getting to use to your modus operandi.
> Those power plants are being built in China and India and nothing to do with our government.






> India’s new draft National Electricity Plan for the two five year periods to 2027 unambiguously concludes that beyond the half-built plants already under construction, India does not require any new coal-fired power stations.
> 
> India is accelerating an already rapid diversification away from coal-fired power generation. Energy Minister Piyush Goyal’s strategy is to cut pollution and drive down costs for the consumer, while fully accommodating sustained, strong Indian economic growth.
> 
> ...




http://reneweconomy.com.au/no-new-coal-fired-power-plants-india-80026/

So where did you get 852 new coal plants from ?


----------



## noco (14 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> http://reneweconomy.com.au/no-new-coal-fired-power-plants-india-80026/
> 
> So where did you get 852 new coal plants from ?




Geez Rumpy, please scroll back up and read my pots and links


....World wide there are some 2400 coal fired power plants being built around the world


----------



## Tisme (14 February 2017)

So third world countries are building new coal fired stations, what does that say about those amongst us who think we should use taxpayer money to do the same?

Even the existing coal fired operators here aren't interested in building new coal fireds and it is nought to do with policy settings, but a desire to get a foot into the door of the inevitable future.

In the meantime Govt should own and operate the remaining horse and buggies.


----------



## Tisme (14 February 2017)

Reflecting on the Liberal Party of 1960 and the Liberal party of today post Hawke/Keating 1983.

Harold eventually took to taking off on holidays after handing down budgets to avoid criticism.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/a...imits=dateFrom=1960-01-01|||dateTo=1960-12-31


----------



## noco (14 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> So third world countries are building new coal fired stations, what does that say about those amongst us who think we should use taxpayer money to do the same?
> 
> Even the existing coal fired operators here aren't interested in building new coal fireds and it is nought to do with policy settings, but a desire to get a foot into the door of the inevitable future.
> 
> In the meantime Govt should own and operate the remaining horse and buggies.





Tisme said:


> So third world countries are building new coal fired stations, what does that say about those amongst us who think we should use taxpayer money to do the same?
> 
> Even the existing coal fired operators here aren't interested in building new coal fireds and it is nought to do with policy settings, but a desire to get a foot into the door of the inevitable future.
> 
> In the meantime Govt should own and operate the remaining horse and buggies.




Where did you get the idea that third world countries are the only ones building coal fired power stations?

There is another 1548 being built in other parts of the world especially Germany.

If we continue down the path of the Green/Labor socialists coalition policy of 50% renewables, then we will be in strife without some alternative base load power stations whether it be coal, gas, oil or nuclear.

Actually I read somewhere where there are companies who have shown interest in new coal fired power station......There is even talk about a new one in North Queensland where there is an abundance of coal....I will try to find a link for you...But we have to get rid of the Palaszczuk Labor Government in Queensland first as they are against it to appease the Greens.


----------



## Tisme (14 February 2017)

noco said:


> Where did you get the idea that third world countries are the only ones building coal fired power stations?
> 
> There is another 1548 being built in other parts of the world especially Germany.
> 
> ...





There was a n interview on ABC Business last night worth watching:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-13/extended-interview-with-catherine-tanna/8267072


----------



## sptrawler (15 February 2017)

Noco is right, we live in a media fed cocoon world, planet Australia.
We can't burn our coal in a power station, but it is o.k to export it to somewhere else.lol
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-31/japan-coal-power-plants/8224302


----------



## Logique (15 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Liar liar pants on fire:
> https://mobile.twitter.com/PoliticsFairfax/status/830856277123227648
> "Australia Institute executive director Ben Oquist, whose progressive think tank filed the FOI application, said it was regrettable that the government had acted politically despite being cautioned to wait.
> "AEMO had told federal public servants and political advisers that renewable energy was not to blame for the blackout. But instead of informing the people of South Australia of this fact, both the Energy Minister and Prime Minister chose to push a false narrative about wind power," he said."
> View attachment 69933



Clever spin, bordering on outright mendacity, but that's all, and discredited by the Govt in Question Time yesterday.  I wouldn't be taking advice on energy policy from a "progressive think tank".  SA has 40% renewables delivering intermittent energy.

Denmark has to import coal, unlike Australia which has a comparative advantage in this area.  And Denmark has no issues with exporting oil and letting someone else burn it.  They've just exported the problem. Their renewables industry is heavily subsidized. Read.. expensive energy.


> http://www.news.com.au/technology/e...l/news-story/bc3bbc8be17d80844bc05ab7f5760d56
> ..“*South Australia has been a basket case when it comes to energy policy* and we’ve made the point that (Premier) Jay Weatherill’s big experiment has failed,” Federal Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg told Sky News..
> 
> http://www.worldwatch-europe.org/node/304
> ...


----------



## bellenuit (15 February 2017)

Logique said:


> Denmark has to import coal, unlike Australia which has a comparative advantage in this area.  And Denmark has no issues with exporting oil and letting someone else burn it.  They've just exported the problem. Their renewables industry is heavily subsidized. Read.. expensive energy.




I also believe that Denmark relies heavily on the German power network when its wind farms and other renewable resources can't maintain the required levels of power generation.


----------



## Logique (15 February 2017)

bellenuit said:


> I also believe that Denmark relies heavily on the German power network when its wind farms and other renewable resources can't maintain the required levels of power generation.



My understanding also.  I'm not picking on the Danes, but they are held up as the role model for wind energy. Some role model.

And pity the poor Croweaters, having to look to _Victoria_ for supplementary electricity!


----------



## Tisme (15 February 2017)

bellenuit said:


> I also believe that Denmark relies heavily on the German power network when its wind farms and other renewable resources can't maintain the required levels of power generation.



 Germany imports 61% of it's energy needs(oil, gas and hard coal). 90% of hard coal (13% of energy) comes from USA, Colombia and Russia). It does mine ~180m tonnes of brown coal making it the biggest burner  for power in the world.


----------



## Tisme (15 February 2017)

Sound familiar?


----------



## SirRumpole (20 February 2017)

Another good piece by Ian Verrender on housing afforability.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-...y-debate-analysis-how-did-we-get-here/8284646


----------



## overhang (21 February 2017)

It's mind boggling that the Turnbull government is now wants to make changes to the CEFC to include coal.  It's the last thing the coal industry needs is more subsidies.  Yet he is trying to flog this dead horse that is carbon capture and storage.  The coal industry has already been caught out using a subsidy for clean coal to fund a propaganda campaign during the last election campaign. There are no large scale CSS in operation around the world and pilot studies have shown that coal power plants lose between 20-60% fuel output and the costs are huge.


----------



## Junior (21 February 2017)

overhang said:


> It's mind boggling that the Turnbull government is now wants to make changes to the CEFC to include coal.  It's the last thing the coal industry needs is more subsidies.  Yet he is trying to flog this dead horse that is carbon capture and storage.  The coal industry has already been caught out using a subsidy for clean coal to fund a propaganda campaign during the last election campaign. There are no large scale CSS in operation around the world and pilot studies have shown that coal power plants lose between 20-60% fuel output and the costs are huge.




It's very sad isn't it.  There must be some powerful vested interests at play.

So many exciting technologies available, and we have to choose to go back in time and pretend coal is this amazing new fuel source, when it's widely recognised as the most polluting and damaging option out there.


----------



## PZ99 (21 February 2017)

That shot looks like the sinking titanic and eventually it's going to happen


----------



## Tisme (21 February 2017)

It came to me a moment ago...wasn't it Malcolm who was accused by a Judge of "poisoning the fountain of justice" back in the 1980's when he did his master's bidding and filed a vexatious suit against a commissioner in the Costigan Royal Commission? It killed his career as a legal eagle I seem to recall.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> It came to me a moment ago...wasn't it Malcolm who was accused by a Judge of "poisoning the fountain of justice" back in the 1980's when he did his master's bidding and filed a vexatious suit against a commissioner in the Costigan Royal Commission? It killed his career as a legal eagle I seem to recall.




Very interesting.

Here is one version of it, I wonder why Labor hasn't run with it.

https://kangaroocourtofaustralia.co...ed-the-fountain-of-justice-said-justice-hunt/


----------



## noco (21 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Very interesting.
> 
> Here is one version of it, I wonder why Labor hasn't run with it.
> 
> https://kangaroocourtofaustralia.co...ed-the-fountain-of-justice-said-justice-hunt/




Also from the Kangaroo Court of Australia.

*Bill Shorten’s ex Debbie Beale was in the “Union Wives Club” with Kathy Jackson says Labor staffer*
by Shane Dowling on December 10, 2016 in Bill Shorten

Bill Shorten and his former wife Debbie Beale were highly likely “benefiting from the proceeds of crime” given their previous close relationship with Kathy Jackson says newly appointed Labor Party staffer Peter Wicks. Peter Wicks, who since the 31st of October 2016 has been employed as a staff member by federal Labor MP Michael Danby, […]

2 Comments • Continue Reading →




*Bill Shorten’s crime gang ignites civil war in the Labor Party and union movement*
by Shane Dowling on December 4, 2016 in Bill Shorten, Senator Kimberley Kitching

In the last few days Bill Shorten’s allies have escalated a civil war in the Labor Party and union movement and it is now unavoidable that in the coming months it will explode. At the heart of the civil war is the ongoing fraud at the Health Services Union and now involves alleged fraud and misuse […]


----------



## pixel (21 February 2017)

Isn't that typical:
Turnbull and his ilk are exposed as sleezebags, liars, and cheats, and up comes  -  not a rational response, but a dish of dirt against another person's mate.
FFS, keep quiet if you don't have anything relevant to contribute. Bang your drum in one of your favourite hangouts that bash Labor. Heaven knows you've started an abundance of those. But if you can't find anything to say in Turnbull's defense, the old "others are also behaving badly" doesn't wash.


----------



## noco (21 February 2017)

pixel said:


> Isn't that typical:
> Turnbull and his ilk are exposed as sleezebags, liars, and cheats, and up comes  -  not a rational response, but a dish of dirt against another person's mate.
> FFS, keep quiet if you don't have anything relevant to contribute. Bang your drum in one of your favourite hangouts that bash Labor. Heaven knows you've started an abundance of those. But if you can't find anything to say in Turnbull's defense, the old "others are also behaving badly" doesn't wash.




Pixel, I dislike Turnbull as much as you do and Shorten less still.......You lefties like to dish it out but just can't take your own medicine when it comes to criticism of your Fabian Leader or the Labor Party.

Too bad you don't like it.......This is what they call free speech...I know you lefties like to dominate this FORUM  and it is a regular pattern of the left to character assassinate, intimidate and and ridicule an opposition if their opinion or comment is not to their liking.....You might be able to frighten some away with your delinquent tactic but there is no point of imposing it on me......Other prominent lefties have tried this caper and have failed miserably.......I really believed this bullying had stopped some months ago but you seem hell bent on using it again. 

If you want to use the Kangaroo Court feel free to so but look at the other articles as well not just cherry pick on an article that just suits you.

Who in the the hell do you think you are telling me keep quiet?......Think again sport.


----------



## Tisme (24 February 2017)

The combination of the omnibus legislation going through the senate which reduces family benefits and the reduction in penalty rates is going to bite hard for a lot of working/welfare class come June.

I bet there is still a significant number of those who will still vote Liberal/National at the next poll. And we wonder at blind faith in religion.


----------



## pixel (24 February 2017)

noco said:


> You lefties like to dish it out but just can't take your own medicine when it comes to criticism of your Fabian Leader or the Labor Party.



It's not your inane rants against your favourite fictions that I'm talking about, noco.
It's the observation that you try to divert attention from *"The Turnbull Government"*, which is *the subject of this thread*, by going off-topic and attacking someone not to YOUR liking. In Internet etiquette, that's defined as *trolling*.
Nobody minds your contributions - but stick to the topic, "sport"!


----------



## PZ99 (24 February 2017)

Coalition's finished. First in WA and then Federally.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 February 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Coalition's finished. First in WA and then Federally.




I think you are correct. A return to Abbott will hasten their demise.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 February 2017)

Tony Abbott the wrecker, as if we didn't know...



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-...al-assassin-analysis-by-chris-uhlmann/8301248

--


----------



## pixel (24 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Tony Abbott the wrecker, as if we didn't know...
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-...al-assassin-analysis-by-chris-uhlmann/8301248
> --



Someone should persuade him and his acolytes to join Cori whatsisname and hide under a rock. Maybe they'll find a coal pit somewhere.
That would liberate the few halfway decent Liberals deserving of that name, who haven't lost their social conscience and believe in balance between personal rights and communal responsibilities.


----------



## Logique (24 February 2017)

Never fear, a steady hand at the tiller...there is nothing to fear Malcolm

Article link/image credit: http://www.mamamia.com.au/julie-bishop-2/


----------



## noco (27 February 2017)

The Liberal Party under Malcolm Turnbull and is deep $hit and Turnbull can only blame himself..... henever takes the blame and in this case he is blaming Tony Abbott.........Turnbull is losing voters left right and center and it is because he has gone too far to the left........I am starting to believe he wants the Green/Labor socialist coalition to win the next election and by gawd he going about it the right way.

With the polls the way they are, Turnbull should resign with dignity before there is an implosion in the Liberal Party.



http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/op...t/news-story/8e2eb09421366cc155f193f8e3cd7e0f


----------



## Logique (27 February 2017)

At 10%, One Nation is nearly as popular as the Greens.
The original article under is behind the _Aussie_ paywall: 







> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...s/news-story/90040942626998eef7c2019dffd0506d
> ..The latest Newspoll, taken exclusively for The Australian, reveals a slump in the *Coalition’s primary vote to 34 per cent*, five points lower than in the weeks before Mr Turnbull toppled Mr Abbott as prime minister.
> Disaffected voters have driven Pauline Hanson’s *One Nation to 10 per cent of the primary vote*, more than doubling that party’s support since November, as its leader seeks to echo Donald Trump’s appeal to conservatives...


----------



## dutchie (27 February 2017)

'He knew exactly what he was doing': Malcolm Turnbull blames Tony Abbott's 'outburst' for Coalition's worst poll result in two years

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...bull-accuses-Tony-Abbott-sabotaging-poll.html

Spot on Malcolm,  it's all Tonys' fault. Without him interfering I'm sure the LNP would have got into the high 30's.
Absolutely nothing to do with policies (or lack of them).


----------



## Tisme (27 February 2017)

On question time at the moment, Barnaby and Chris Pyne have the answers, trouble is no one is asking the questions to the answers.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> On question time at the moment, Barnaby and Chris Pyne have the answers, trouble is no one is asking the questions to the answers.




Both are morons, chattering fools. Can't stand either of them.


----------



## Tisme (27 February 2017)

dutchie said:


> 'He knew exactly what he was doing': Malcolm Turnbull blames Tony Abbott's 'outburst' for Coalition's worst poll result in two years
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...bull-accuses-Tony-Abbott-sabotaging-poll.html
> 
> ...




If he knew what he is doing, does that mean the blowout in the debt is deliberate ...  of course it would be Labor's fault?

Someone should have stopped the blame game when Tony Abbott started it to be unaccountable for his inactions. The LNP has got so used to blaming Labor and the working class, they don't know any other way to behave... it's an habitual, albeit juvenile method of evading responsibility.


----------



## noco (27 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> If he knew what he is doing, does that mean the blowout in the debt is deliberate ...  of course it would be Labor's fault?
> 
> Someone should have stopped the blame game when Tony Abbott started it to be unaccountable for his inactions. The LNP has got so used to blaming Labor and the working class, they don't know any other way to behave... it's an habitual, albeit juvenile method of evading responsibility.




INACTION you say.

Didn't Abbott stop the boats
Didn't Abbott get rid of the Carbon tax....You know the one Gillard said would never happen under a Government she led?
Didn't Abbott do away with the MRRT?......You know the one Swannie introduced....the one that cost more to administer than the revenue it received....The MRRT was supposed to fund the NDIS...Job well done by the Worlds greatest treasurer.


----------



## dutchie (27 February 2017)

Blaming Abbott for poor polling results is a sure sign that Turnbull is a LOSER.


----------



## Logique (27 February 2017)

"_He knew exactly what he was doing_".  It takes one to know one Malcolm.

Greens = 10% primary
One Nation = 10% primary


----------



## Tisme (27 February 2017)

noco said:


> INACTION you say.
> 
> Didn't Abbott stop the boats
> Didn't Abbott get rid of the Carbon tax....You know the one Gillard said would never happen under a Government she led?
> Didn't Abbott do away with the MRRT?......You know the one Swannie introduced....the one that cost more to administer than the revenue it received....The MRRT was supposed to fund the NDIS...Job well done by the Worlds greatest treasurer.




Rudd stopped the boats
Carbon tax took buggerall revenue
MRRT took zip tax


----------



## dutchie (27 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Rudd stopped the boats




ha ha ha ha   , Good one Tisme.


----------



## Tisme (27 February 2017)

dutchie said:


> ha ha ha ha   , Good one Tisme.





You aren't supposed to respond


----------



## Tisme (27 February 2017)

Back benchers are busy chatting about who to support after Malcolm gets the flick a couple of months after the budget. Long knives are out in Canberra tonight.


----------



## Tisme (27 February 2017)

Labor meets LNP:


----------



## dutchie (27 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> You aren't supposed to respond




Oops, sorry.
(but thanks for giving me a laugh)


----------



## drsmith (27 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Back benchers are busy chatting about who to support after Malcolm gets the flick a couple of months after the budget. Long knives are out in Canberra tonight.



You're having fun.

I did too when Labor was in the same strife.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Back benchers are busy chatting about who to support after Malcolm gets the flick a couple of months after the budget. Long knives are out in Canberra tonight.




Leadership speculation is growing in Canberra...

I wonder who the next sucker will be. Morrison ? He's too much of an a***hole, the public will spit him out.


----------



## noco (27 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Rudd stopped the boats
> Carbon tax took buggerall revenue
> MRRT took zip tax




Tisme has just given us the best joke of the year.......LMAO.


----------



## Tisme (27 February 2017)

drsmith said:


> You're having fun.
> 
> I did too when Labor was in the same strife.





That's where I have the best of both worlds, coz I enjoyed it when Gillard and Rudd got there's too


----------



## sptrawler (28 February 2017)

It was said, Turnbull was a waste of space, funnily it was by the LNP people. 
Most Laborites, were saying they would change allegiance, if Turnbull was the leader.
Just goes to show, how stupid they are. 
But as usual short term memory loss comes into play.lol
Shorten still won't get in, he is an absolute joke, even useless Malcolm will beat him.
Heaven help us if Pauline gets enough candidates, because she will beat them both.lol


----------



## SirRumpole (28 February 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Shorten still won't get in, he is an absolute joke, even useless Malcolm will beat him.




The bloke that took 15 seats off the Libs last election ?

I agree that there are better choices in Labor but I think Shorten will be PM after the next election even though he is a bit of a dill.


----------



## noco (28 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Rudd stopped the boats
> Carbon tax took buggerall revenue
> MRRT took zip tax




When Shorten stabbed Gillard in the back mid 2013 and replaced her with recycled Kevin Rudd, Rudd did a rushed deal with the PNG government (July19 2103) to try and deter the boat people from coming to Australia.....Rudd had to save some of the furniture from Labor being wiped out at the 2013 election....He knew it would be popular with some naive voters.........He thought by adopting a policy of no new arrivals would be processed in Australia and that they would be settled in PNG it would deter asylum seekers to take the illegal trip.

In the next 8 weeks up to the election September 2013, some 3000 arrived and were sent from Christmas Island  to Manus and Nauru.......Rudd made no attempt to stop the boats......Abbott did. 

https://theconversation.com/australia-and-asylum-seekers-where-do-the-rudd-reforms-leave-us-16252


----------



## Tisme (28 February 2017)

noco said:


> When Shorten stabbed Gillard in the back mid 2013 and replaced her with recycled Kevin Rudd, Rudd did a rushed deal with the PNG government (July19 2103) to try and deter the boat people from coming to Australia.....Rudd had to save some of the furniture from Labor being wiped out at the 2013 election....He knew it would be popular with some naive voters.........He thought by adopting a policy of no new arrivals would be processed in Australia and that they would be settled in PNG it would deter asylum seekers to take the illegal trip.
> 
> In the next 8 weeks up to the election September 2013, some 3000 arrived and were sent from Christmas Island  to Manus and Nauru.......Rudd made no attempt to stop the boats......Abbott did.
> 
> https://theconversation.com/australia-and-asylum-seekers-where-do-the-rudd-reforms-leave-us-16252





Let's get pedantic = so how many boats arrived on the actual Australian shores after Rudd's edict? 

Of course you are taking the word of a govt that lied and abused statistics to gain power, so none of us really know the actual attempts since Rudd to date because it's kept secret. For all we know they are still coming, but undetected by the navy and the dogooders. 

We do know that 3753 asylum seekers arriving by boat between July 19 2013 and September 2013 all trying to get in while the ALP and LNP played who's the biggest biatch.

In a rare declaration Abbott govt turned back 633 between Dec 2013 and Aug 2015 (average 33/month) and paid $5000 to each of the 20 boat owners to turn back to Indonesia. One would assume the Rudd solution was very effective given that cliff drop in numbers from an average of 1684 people/month over the prior few years?


----------



## noco (28 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Let's get pedantic = so how many boats arrived on the actual Australian shores after Rudd's edict?
> 
> Of course you are taking the word of a govt that lied and abused statistics to gain power, so none of us really know the actual attempts since Rudd to date because it's kept secret. For all we know they are still coming, but undetected by the navy and the dogooders.
> 
> ...




Rudd's solution was ineffective....It did not stop the boats......Abbott and Morrison were the ones who turned back the boats


----------



## SirRumpole (28 February 2017)

noco said:


> Rudd's solution was ineffective....It did not stop the boats......Abbott and Morrison were the ones who turned back the boats




As was pointed out, "on water matters" are kept secret, we don't know how many boats have slipped past the net. Australia has a large coastline.


----------



## Tisme (28 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The bloke that took 15 seats off the Libs last election ?
> 
> I agree that there are better choices in Labor but I think Shorten will be PM after the next election even though he is a bit of a dill.





Yes he's a shoe in at the moment, so the LNP needs to skewer the boss and put someone else in so that the honeymoon period overlaps the election date.

Having said that, it seems the LNP lack any negotiation skills and prefer to sook and yell. The economy is tanking under their increased and growing spending "like drunken sailors". Maybe the job of being "economic managers" is too much for them and they need some time out.

I really have a problem with Tanya, Penny and all those uber social engineers that hang in their gang and I'm not sure Bill can control them.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> I really have a problem with Tanya, Penny and all those uber social engineers that hang in their gang and I'm not sure Bill can control them.




Yes, so do I. I think you need someone from the Right of the Labor party to control those nerds but I'm not up with Labor factions so I don't know where they all stand. Shorten is allegedly from the Right but he seems to pander to the LGBTI and feminazis too much for my liking.

Bowen and Butler seem more pragmatic, I think the main emphasis would be on the economy if they were in charge.


----------



## moXJO (28 February 2017)

Actually libs have been making some decent progress on trade relations with Asia. They have been making the right moves in growing this area. But the important boring stuff is ignored by the media for the latest gotcha moment.

Anyone who thinks Shorten would make a good PM is semi retarded. He will say anything to get a vote. His front bench couldn't organize flies on $hit.  Labor recorded their lowest vote last election I thought. Their grubby deals on preferences was all that boosted them.

Libs won't be catching many votes either. Too many smug Trump wannabes.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 February 2017)

moXJO said:


> Their grubby deals on preferences was all that boosted them.






Lets see what grubby deals the Libs do like their WA mates. Stabbing their Coalition partners in the back for One Nation.

What a hoot.


----------



## Tisme (28 February 2017)

moXJO said:


> Labor recorded their lowest vote last election I thought. Their grubby deals on preferences was all that boosted them.
> 
> Libs won't be catching many votes either. Too many smug Trump wannabes.




Can you refresh us on the grubby preference deals that are the exclusive domain of Labor? Honestly I can't recall anything that was unexpected?


----------



## SirRumpole (28 February 2017)

George Christensen has resigned as Nationals Chief Whip.

Next stop Hello Cory ?


----------



## drsmith (28 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> That's where I have the best of both worlds, coz I enjoyed it when Gillard and Rudd got there's too



You weren't around back then.


----------



## Tisme (28 February 2017)

drsmith said:


> You weren't around back then.




Geezuz, first sign of ructions in the Lib Party and you are all over the board like a mad woman's underpants. Keeping the faith are we 

I might not have been on ASF, but there is another here who will vouch for my critiques elsewhere.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Geezuz, first sign of ructions in the Lib Party and you are all over the board like a mad woman's underpants. Keeping the faith are we
> 
> I might not have been on ASF, but there is another here who will vouch for my critiques elsewhere.




He's been around allright.


----------



## drsmith (28 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Geezuz, first sign of ructions in the Lib Party and you are all over the board like a mad woman's underpants. Keeping the faith are we



I'm just pointing out the obvious flaw in your self analysis.


----------



## sptrawler (28 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The bloke that took 15 seats off the Libs last election ?
> 
> I agree that there are better choices in Labor but I think Shorten will be PM after the next election even though he is a bit of a dill.



I certainly hope you're wrong.
We are sinking in debt, because we have to support the only industry that is employing people (housing)
We are giving away our resources, to save what jobs are left there.
We are not prepared to put in place any checks and safeguards, in the welfare system.
The only sector that can be taxed, and be allowed through parliament, is the working class.
There will be a big backlash, Australia is generally apathetic, but some shocks may unfold.IMO


----------



## Tisme (28 February 2017)

drsmith said:


> I'm just pointing out the obvious flaw in your self analysis.




No you're not, you're up to your usual superficial sniping and trolling for effect.


----------



## drsmith (28 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> No you're not, you're up to your usual superficial sniping and trolling for effect.



You can throw as much personal stuff as you like.

It's not going to change the date you joined this forum.


----------



## sptrawler (28 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> No you're not, you're up to your usual superficial sniping and trolling for effect.



A bit of the "Pot calling the Kettle black" there.lol


----------



## Tisme (28 February 2017)

sptrawler said:


> A bit of the "Pot calling the Kettle black" there.lol




So what are you trying to say?  Smith is a big boy, I'm sure he can suck it up and doesn't need you nursing his wounded pride.

Meanwhile back on topic I think James has learned much, although I think he should have mentioned "progressive liberalism" as a key plank

https://theconversation.com/as-the-...-fracture-we-may-be-watching-its-demise-72843

"Such claims depart from Menzies’ principles in two core texts. The first is his famous “Forgotten People” broadcast in 1943. The second is his essay on “The revival of Liberalism in Australia” in Afternoon Light."


----------



## drsmith (28 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> So what are you trying to say?  Smith is a big boy, I'm sure he can suck it up and doesn't need you nursing his wounded pride.



As I said before, you can throw as much personal stuff as you like. I really don't mind.

It's an acknowledgement that you've lost the specific point of argument at hand.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 February 2017)

sptrawler said:


> I certainly hope you're wrong.
> We are sinking in debt, because we have to support the only industry that is employing people (housing)
> We are giving away our resources, to save what jobs are left there.
> We are not prepared to put in place any checks and safeguards, in the welfare system.
> ...




Plus the fact that both sides are virtual policy vacuums.

At least Labor have a housing affordability strategy but beyond that all they have is gay marriage and covering up for unions.

All the Libs have is a company tax cut that won't show any benefit for decades.

And if the GDP figures tomorrow show negative growth then we are in a recession. Even those  financial fools the Labor party couldn't manage that.

Mr great economic manager Turnbull could have more egg over his smug face.


----------



## sptrawler (28 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Mr great economic manager Turnbull could have more egg over his smug face.




Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't you one of those espousing the virtues of Turnbull, pre his ascendence to the top job.lol


----------



## sptrawler (28 February 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Plus the fact that both sides are virtual policy vacuums.
> 
> At least Labor have a housing affordability strategy but beyond that all they have is gay marriage and covering up for unions.



I'm all for popping the housing bubble, but you had better have a lot of cash in the bank if it happens, it is the only thing propping up our sick economy.
There won't be any discussion about the pro's and cons of cutting welfare, there won't be any money for it, it would be slashed and burnt no matter who is in office.lol
The difference between us and Greece, Italy and Spain, is our property bubble. OMG lol
It doesn't affect me personally, but these statements show how dependent we are on NSW at the moment.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-...ias-gdp-growth-in-201516-20170228-gumztb.html

It all indicates a very precariously balanced economy, blowing a hole in the only thing sustaining it, will cause an interesting situation.
But silly Billy has the answer.lol


----------



## moXJO (28 February 2017)

Tisme said:


> Can you refresh us on the grubby preference deals that are the exclusive domain of Labor? Honestly I can't recall anything that was unexpected?




Here is what was happening prior.
'Friends' of no particular political party would field candidates that ran similar lines to independents (that were perceived a threat in close seats). The idea was to dilute the vote and direct preferences. The candidate usually had no idea what was going on.


----------



## noco (28 February 2017)

sptrawler said:


> A bit of the "Pot calling the Kettle black" there.lol



I could not agree more......Tisme is a past master at this caper.....He only knows how to play the man and  not the ball.


----------



## moXJO (28 February 2017)

sptrawler said:


> I'm all for popping the housing bubble, but you had better have a lot of cash in the bank if it happens, it is the only thing propping up our sick economy.




Libs setting up stronger trade in Asia is a step in the right direction. We have billions of people above us and we are about 30 million. Plenty of opportunities and to be fair, Bishop has been pushing pretty hard.

Housing market still looks a long way off from popping. Unless there is another system shock. Plenty of Chinese money still around. I don't think people can fathom just how many rich Asians there are. And how many are coming here.


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

noco said:


> I could not agree more......Tisme is a past master at this caper.....He only knows how to play the man and  not the ball.





Hang about, I just have to open another box of tissues... the last one ran out. Seriously mate you throw full on abusive tantrums here and we mostly look on in awe thinking ..." it's so cute knowing he's still got some residual fuel, even if only E10, in the tank"


----------



## noco (1 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> Hang about, I just have to open another box of tissues... the last one ran out. Seriously mate you throw full on abusive tantrums here and we mostly look on in awe thinking ..." it's so cute knowing he's still got some residual fuel, even if only E10, in the tank"




Tisme, I am not alone in my opinion of you...There are others on here who think the same.....Get down off your high horse and come back down to Earth and you just might receive more respect.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2017)

noco said:


> Tisme, I am not alone in my opinion of you...There are others on here who think the same.....Get down off your high horse and come back down to Earth and you just might receive more respect.




At least he doesn't make a habit of gullibly posting fake news.


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> At least he doesn't make a habit of gullibly posting fake news.




And I like my horse, it gives me a clear view


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

noco said:


> Tisme, I am not alone in my opinion of you...There are others on here who think the same.....Get down off your high horse and come back down to Earth and you just might receive more respect.





Oh so now you are talking for the others now?

Had a plebiscite and decided dickhed here isn't sufficiently sycophantically aligned to some archaic political party that doesn't resemble it's original intent, but still has halfwits fawning over the carcass?

Cobber if you had anything to offer I might listen, but so far there is nothing mitigating coming from you and the two or three persistent trolling critics except jealously at me having independent opinions that don't fit into the cliche squares they have been conditioned to accept as truths.

So long as I keep getting likes from my peers I'll just keep doing what I like doing without you trying to censor my right to pi55 drones off.


----------



## noco (1 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> Cobber if you had anything to offer I might listen, but so far there is nothing mitigating coming from you and the two or three persistent trolling critics except jealously at me having independent opinions that don't fit into the cliche squares they have been conditioned to accept as truths.
> 
> .




I tried to explain to you how to lead burn and how to bend large bore copper and steel pipe .

I tried to help you but you could not lower yourself to listen to somebody who knew more about the subject than you.

Please don't reply any more, being constantly character assassinated by you is boring to say the least.....You are like a juvenile who loves to play games on ASF...You can have the last word if you wish but you will get no more from me, I am so tired of your crap......Time you grew up......Apathetic   at best.


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

noco said:


> I tried to explain to you how to lead burn and how to bend large bore copper and steel pipe .
> 
> I tried to help you but you could not lower yourself to listen to somebody who knew more about the subject than you.
> 
> Please don't reply any more, being constantly character assassinated by you is boring to say the least.....You are like a juvenile who loves to play games on ASF...You can have the last word if you wish but you will get no more from me, I am so tired of your crap......Time you grew up......Apathetic   at best.





Nonsense you road in with both holsters unclipped and guns cocked. You can't bear the thought someone might: 1) know more than you 2) not give a toss. 

Next time you get down in the gutter throwing a tanty at some poor undeserving victim, perhaps you might reflect on the far less intrusive medicine you just rec'd.

And another thing, that posse of members you have elected yourself mouthpiece and leader of comprises one or two who railed against my displeasure of child treatment at the hands of lewd exposure by adults. I can never consider them worth twopence for that betrayal of their civilian responsibilities. Think about it.


----------



## moXJO (1 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> And another thing, that posse of members you have elected yourself mouthpiece and leader of comprises one or two who railed against my displeasure of child treatment at the hands of lewd exposure by adults. I can never consider them worth twopence for that betrayal of their civilian responsibilities. Think about it.



You're not still butt hurt over BondGate are you.
Good Times.....


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

moXJO said:


> You're not still butt hurt over BondGate are you.
> Good Times.....





One can only hope the progeny of said men are strong in character and have have protective arms around them whilst in company of immorality personified.

Personally I don't joke about child safety


----------



## moXJO (1 March 2017)

Yet you vilify gay babies and homosexual icons like bonds. That Sir is the character of weak dishwater.


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

moXJO said:


> Yet you vilify gay babies and homosexual icons like bonds. That Sir is the character of weak dishwater.




No it's the character of strength in face of stupid comments designed to inflame, in the absence of quality criticism.

Because you are gay doesn't mean you entitled to speak as if righteous. In fact, the moral turpitude displayed by the Doctor and you know who when it came to children's safety goes a long way as a determinant to character assessment.

No matter however you look at it,  condoning the abuse of children through exposure of their innocent minds to lust and filth that makes even decent men squirm, is not negotiable. I'd like to think the attack on my posts back then was driven by a hateful spite on me, but continuing to trivialise those arguments is just cements my suspicions that I am indeed dealing with some members who are menace to society.


----------



## moXJO (1 March 2017)

As a black gay man and Greens voter I find it comical that you still bite over this issue.
I dare say you are the type to turn a blind eye to the catholic priests as they touched up their flock. And yet rage at underwear ads raping kiddies eyes. Oh the humanity. 

Luckily those children that witnessed the bonds ads of the 80's and 90's will be eligible for victims compensation under our greens proposal.


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

http://thenewdaily.com.au/money/finance-news/2017/02/28/malcolm-turnbull-energy-hoax/

"
When Malcolm Turnbull became Prime Minister in 2015, many thought the influence of coal and gas industry lobbyists on the government would be reduced.

Apparently not.

A string of reports in recent days reveal a weakened Prime Minister falling into line with the “coal is good for humanity” views of his predecessor.

Here’s a taste:

– The government has ignored the recommendations of an independent selection panel and appointed Minerals Council chairwoman Vanessa Guthrie to the board of the ABC – which last year was accused, and then cleared, of ‘bias’ against fossil fuels."


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

Not good when you own power base starts giving you bad press:

"

The Australian
11:14AM March 1, 2017



*DAVID CROWE*





Political correspondent
Canberra
@CroweDM




Malcolm Turnbull has entered a danger zone in the latest Newspoll that matches key points in history when leaders have been driven from power.

Bob Hawke, Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott all faced moments like this. Yet leaders like John Howard have survived grim polls. So how does the Newspoll, published exclusively in The Australian, compare with the lessons from the past"

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...e/news-story/50f3a1d1b31ac26cd2adeea7f7919b41


----------



## moXJO (1 March 2017)

noco said:


> Tisme, I am not alone in my opinion of you...There are others on here who think the same.....Get down off your high horse and come back down to Earth and you just might receive more respect.




HaHa
So that's what set Tisme off. The thought that board members were conspiring against him.



> And another thing, that posse of members you have elected yourself mouthpiece and leader of comprises one or two who railed against my displeasure of child treatment at the hands of lewd exposure by adults. I can never consider them worth twopence for that betrayal of their civilian responsibilities. Think about it.




Oh Tisme......
 Noco has got to you good.
 I have never said a bad word about you privately to anyone. Ill troll you in public thank you very much.
But I have noticed as your posts and Rumpoles has turned to trashy bleating about liberals. I fear Noco has gotten under your skin.


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

moXJO said:


> HaHa
> So that's what set Tisme off. The thought that board members were conspiring against him.
> 
> 
> ...




Don't be silly you are sounding like a drowning man. Weighing Noco's jealousy of me and Rumpole is not  a merit you should be using ... honestly it's like grabbing a sinking raft for bouyancy. Noco is probably trying to distance himself from you after my reveal and you keep dragging him back

I have no idea about private conversations that your refer to ... comprehension?

Liberal Party means nothing to me as does the Labor Party, but the Liberal Party are in govt so they take the hit for their ineptitude, something even rusted on Liberals here are accepting of late.

By all means you continue voting Liberal and promoting/fiddling with mens genitals, but from my vantage point that doesn't look compelling

Just try to to pick up your game on the morals front and not make light of children's innocence and welfare.


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

Govt is going to use Defence as an excuse to control power production, poles and wires. = gearing up for election issues.


----------



## moXJO (1 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> Don't be silly you are sounding like a drowning man. Weighing Noco's jealousy of me and Rumpole is not  a merit you should be using ... honestly it's like grabbing a sinking raft for bouyancy.
> 
> I have no idea about private conversations that your refer to ... comprehension?
> 
> ...




Tsk Tsk

Having to resort to deflecting with: "your gay and a pedophile"
The realms of the weak and desperate.



Tisme said:


> Nonsense you road in with both holsters unclipped and guns cocked. You can't bear the thought someone might: 1) know more than you 2) not give a toss.






Tisme said:


> No it's the character of strength in face of stupid comments designed to inflame, in the absence of quality criticism.



Oh the irony 

Noco 1 
Tisme 0


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2017)

Another stuff up by Barnaby Joyce.

*Public servants forced to work from McDonald's after move to Armidale*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-...ed-to-work-from-mcdonalds-in-armidale/8313796

At least they won't have to go far for lunch or coffee.


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Another stuff up by Barnaby Joyce.
> 
> *Public servants forced to work from McDonald's after move to Armidale*
> 
> ...




Is their pay locked in EBA or do they take a 17% pay cut?


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

moXJO said:


> Tsk Tsk
> 
> Having to resort to deflecting with: "your gay and a pedophile"
> The realms of the weak and desperate.
> ...




now you are feigning shame of your lifestyle! You swing in the breeze. I think you know you have been outed and owned once again.

I'm guessing the scorecard is an attempt at making a sympathy friend of Noco. Not sure he's even upto the hassle of adopting a Nigel No-friends, but you might get him on a good day.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2017)

Not good news on the economy from people who should know.

*Shipping industry a bellwether for flailing national economy*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-...lwether-for-flailing-national-economy/8311968


----------



## moXJO (1 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> now you are feigning shame of your lifestyle! You swing in the breeze. I think you know you have been outed and owned once again.
> 
> I'm guessing the scorecard is an attempt at making a sympathy friend of Noco. Not sure he's even upto the hassle of adopting a Nigel No-friends, but you might get him on a good day.




Now, now Tisme 
Blabbering a bunch of self-righteous dribble is hardly owning anyone. Pathetic attempts at shaming- rank amateur at best. Thats the best you have. Desperate for the last say huh? No matter what dribble falls out.

I think your so called "Strength of character" does come into question. Your morals melt faster then butter in the sun. And holding a grudge over the bonds thing for so long. I obviously got to you. Glad you pi$$ your pants a little every time I post.

Noco  1  
Moxjo 1
Tisme ((0)) Butthurt

But please do continue.


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

moXJO said:


> But please do continue.




You started it.

Tisme (3)
Beige People (0)
Parody of the Nazis. Hitler, Himmler and Goebels discuss the Nuremburg Rally....... Not too Camp


----------



## moXJO (1 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> You started it.
> 
> Tisme (3)
> Beige People (0)
> Parody of the Nazis. Hitler, Himmler and Goebels discuss the Nuremburg Rally....... Not too Camp




All jokes aside are you really as homophobic as you make out to be?


----------



## moXJO (1 March 2017)

Look if there is that fear there, I think your off to a good start with Rumpole. You two are up each others butts so much on opinions its hard to tell where Tisme ends and Rumpole starts. You two should meet up and let the relationship flourish. Discuss politics, hold hands, wear matching designer clothes, see "Love Actually 2" together. I'm sure in time that fear and hatred will dissipate.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2017)

moXJO said:


> Look if there is that fear there, I think your off to a good start with Rumpole. You two are up each others butts so much on opinions its hard to tell where Tisme ends and Rumpole starts. You two should meet up and let the relationship flourish. Discuss politics, hold hands, wear matching designer clothes, see "Love Actually 2" together. I'm sure in time that fear and hatred will dissipate.




What a jerk.


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

moXJO said:


> All jokes aside are you really as homophobic as you make out to be?





Do you really have to ask that? 

Never underestimate the entertainment value of theatre. If you read my posts carefully you would know I'm probably more dilligaf than most.

I'm actually very unracist, very much in favour of liberal rights and very very anti big govt. That is tempered by the civilian charity, worker rights and social safety nets as expected in advanced liberal Democracies.

However I have enough respect for those who consider marriage an important hetrosexual tradition that it shouldn't be dishonoured and I think children deserve the opportunity of Male/Female coupled parents by design. Personally I don't think marriage it is all that genuine these days, but you know ......


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2017)

moXJO said:


> Look if there is that fear there, I think your off to a good start with Rumpole. You two are up each others butts so much on opinions its hard to tell where Tisme ends and Rumpole starts. You two should meet up and let the relationship flourish. Discuss politics, hold hands, wear matching designer clothes, see "Love Actually 2" together. I'm sure in time that fear and hatred will dissipate.





Oh dear    You want to maybe ask for that to be deleted?


----------



## moXJO (1 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> Oh dear    You want to maybe ask for that to be deleted?



Im just stirring during trades. 
Probably should get back on topic.
Its a tough gig getting rumpy to bite.

But seriously....
Love is a beautiful thing you two

Sorry Joe


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2017)

moXJO said:


> Love is a beautiful thing you two




And you find it every time you look in a mirror.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2017)

And now some good news.

*Manufacturing rebounds to strongest level since 2002: Australian Industry Group*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-01/manufacturing-rebounds-strongest-since-2002/8313450

I hope they can keep it up and that rising energy prices don't squash the resurgence.


----------



## drsmith (1 March 2017)

I find Labor's tactic on going after the government on FW's decision on weekend penalty rates a bit strange. I would have thought Liberal Party disunity would have been much more fertile ground.

Perhaps they've drawn a conclusion about the attention span of voters post mediscare.


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2017)

drsmith said:


> I find Labor's tactic on going after the government on FW's decision on weekend penalty rates a bit strange. I would have thought Liberal Party disunity would have been much more fertile ground.
> 
> Perhaps they've drawn a conclusion about the attention span of voters post mediscare.




I'm not a Liberal voter but I'm willing to let the "experiment" with reduced penalty rates have a fair chance to create employment.

It's up to business to show that they are prepared to take more workers at a reduced rate. If employment levels in the affected industries don't rise, then jack the rates up again.

So I think Labor should try something else. Like the Lib's policy vacuum in many areas.


----------



## sptrawler (1 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> So I think Labor should try something else. Like the Lib's policy vacuum in many areas.




I agree with you, at last, if Labor have a policy vacuum I may vote for them.

Historically any policy they had, ended up as a disaster, so if they say nothing they might have a chance.
Actually, I think silly billy, has worked it out.


----------



## Tisme (2 March 2017)

sptrawler said:


> I agree with you, at last, if Labor have a policy vacuum I may vote for them.
> 
> Historically any policy they had, ended up as a disaster, so if they say nothing they might have a chance.
> Actually, I think silly billy, has worked it out.





Nah you don't want to vote Labor... please tell me you won't vote Labor, pretty please

I still wake with the nightmare of Kevin Rudd self emolating by announcing a mining tax and that sinking feeling of watching an intelligent man making a stupid decision.  Until someone with the smarts of Keating comes along, I'd rather see them being a potent opposition which adds some IQ into parliament.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> Nah you don't want to vote Labor... please tell me you won't vote Labor, pretty please
> 
> I still wake with the nightmare of Kevin Rudd self emolating by announcing a mining tax and that sinking feeling of watching an intelligent man making a stupid decision.  Until someone with the smarts of Keating comes along, I'd rather see them being a potent opposition which adds some IQ into parliament.




LUG for me anytime !


----------



## Tisme (2 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> LUG for me anytime !





Oh so you are a friend of the antichrist.....


----------



## SirRumpole (2 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> Oh so you are a friend of the antichrist.....




F.A.B.


----------



## Tisme (2 March 2017)

Punishing Tony for speaking out:

"
Updated 2 Feb 2017, 6:58am




*PHOTO:* Warren Mundine (left) has been informed his role has been dissolved. (AAP)
*RELATED STORY:* Mundine rips into imprisonment inquiry
*MAP: *Australia
The body established by Tony Abbott to advise the prime minister on Indigenous issues has temporarily ceased to exist, but Malcolm Turnbull's office says it is still committed to keeping it.

*Key points:*

Warren Mundine reportedly received email informing him all further meetings are cancelled
Mr Mundine has a rocky relationship with Malcolm Turnbull
Recently said Mr Turnbull had stopped talking to him
The ABC understands Cabinet will approve the appointment of a new head and some new members when it meets next week.

Indigenous Advisory Council (IAC) head Warren Mundine has been informed his role and the body itself — established after the 2013 election — have been dissolved.

Mr Mundine is understood to have received an email from the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet to inform him that all further meetings and activities were now cancelled.

Mr Mundine has not been officially informed by Mr Turnbull himself.

But last night a spokeswoman for Mr Turnbull said the Government was still committed to continuing the IAC."


----------



## noco (2 March 2017)

https://www.votocrat.com/votocrat.p...malcolm-turnbull-to-resign-as-pm-of-australia


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2017)

noco said:


> https://www.votocrat.com/votocrat.p...malcolm-turnbull-to-resign-as-pm-of-australia




Interesting comments there. People calling for his resignation because they voted Abbott for PM not Malcolm ......  odd behaviour and memory loss?


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2017)

This is for real !!!! Cost them $4000 and the a candidate for the best wooden performances of the year LOL

The video takes a little time to load

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/nat...artments-youtube-profile-20170302-gupbt4.html


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2017)

And then there's the SBS spoof (because of the previous flick) by Mark Humphries (Chasers)

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/thefeed/article/2017/03/02/sbs-recruitment-come-work-us


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2017)

Interesting how our labour costs are moving and it's obvious why Germany is in such poor shape:


----------



## pixel (3 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> Germany is in such poor shape



LMAO - yeah, very poor shape!
poor buggers have to build their own cars! and since not every German can afford the latest Vee-Dub, Beemer, Merc, Audi, ... - they'll ship them all over the world, so the affluent Aussies, Yanks, Chinese, ... take them off their hands.

Brilliant Logic: Cut Aussie wages, especially in the Service and Hospitality sectors, so more people can go shopping 24x7 and dine-out. That'll help all businesses, Big and Small - mostly the Big and their friendly Politicians on the payroll. Then (almost) everybody can afford to buy their own brand-new Merc. And if that doesn't leave you enough money for a down payment on a Harbourside mansion, just get a better-paying job.


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2017)

pixel said:


> LMAO - yeah, very poor shape!
> poor buggers have to build their own cars!




They could learn a lot from us. I expect they will make junkets to our cities to learn about manufacturing, productivity and transportation systems. They will be in awe of our natural born economic managers on the govt benches.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> They will be in awe of our natural born economic managers on the govt benches.


----------



## noco (4 March 2017)

drsmith said:


> I find Labor's tactic on going after the government on FW's decision on weekend penalty rates a bit strange. I would have thought Liberal Party disunity would have been much more fertile ground.
> 
> Perhaps they've drawn a conclusion about the attention span of voters post mediscare.




Doc, when I look back on life, in the 30s, 40s ad 50s all shops used to closed at noon on Saturday...Pubs were open from  10am to 10 pm and closed on Sunday.....you cold fire a shot gun down Queens Street Brisbane and would not hit anyone.......You could drink and dine at a pub on Sunday but the bars  were closed....You had to order a meal

Saturday after noon was generally reserved for sport.....The city picture theaters were open for those who enjoyed the latest movies. ....Sunday was regarded as the Sabbath day of  R an R.....Some went to church  and some went to the beach or went fishing with their families.....I cannot not recall anyone taking a second job.
You worked your 40 hours for the one boss..If you were asked to work longer hours 

on Saturday or Sunday penalty rates applied  due to the fact that you had to give up your weekend of rest......We were paid 150% on Saturday afternoon and 200% for working on Sunday........

Things began to change in the later part of that century and shops were given sanction to open their doors with longer hours....Pubs were allowed to open on Sundays necessitating more staff.......So you then started to see those who worked their 40 hours for one boss Monday to Friday wanting to earn extra money on the weekends, public holidays and night time.

Ah said the unions, these poor people who are giving up their R and R on the weekends need to be compensated with penalty rates.......So they work for one boss Monday to Friday and a different boss on the weekends....This is when the weekend overtime came into play......Have they worked their 40 hours for the second boss?...NO....The unions have exploited the conditions of the mid 1900's and applied them to modern day living. 

Can you see the picture I am painting?

...


----------



## Tisme (4 March 2017)

This is free trade for you. Who needs skills tests = only Australians

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2015-...inese-electricians-skills/6579290?pfmredir=sm


----------



## Tisme (4 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> This is free trade for you. Who needs skills tests = only Australians
> 
> http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2015-...inese-electricians-skills/6579290?pfmredir=sm




Might be fake


----------



## Smurf1976 (4 March 2017)

The ASX has gone nowhere for just over a decade now.

We've got a key industry, power, falling apart in SA with Vic about to follow.

The price of gas to Australian industry in the Eastern states has roughly tripled.

Housing is unaffordable in the major cities for anyone who isn't on a huge income or otherwise has some above average source of wealth.

Manufacturing is stuffed. Just a few months from now there will be no such thing as an Australian built new car.

All this despite an unprecedented boom in mining and we've also had pretty decent weather for agriculture.

Meanwhile the circus rolls on in Canberra with yet more speculation about leadership.

Our governments of all persuasions have failed us miserably in my view. Rudd, Gillard, Abbott, Turnbull. None of them come anywhere close to the sort of leadership we had in the past and so desperately need now.

Smurf's view = It will take something drastic which either directly affects the masses or at least has them seriously worried to bring real change. That's "worried" as in families and work colleagues discussing it, people literally losing sleep over it and so on. A major problem because anything less doesn't seem to be enough to bring some sense to our politicians.

A recession or other economic debacle would be the most likely. A massive infrastructure failure or natural disaster possibly. God help us if the trigger is that we find ourselves at war (a real military war).

Never before have I been more disappointed in them all and I suspect that a great many Australians would share that view. If they can't govern themselves and can't do anything about such basic things as housing and utilities then our future isn't looking good.

Rant over.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 March 2017)

Smurf1976 said:


> Our governments of all persuasions have failed us miserably in my view. Rudd, Gillard, Abbott, Turnbull. None of them come anywhere close to the sort of leadership we had in the past and so desperately need now.




True. However I would mention that R-G-R introduced innovations like the NBN ,  carbon tax (which was necessary but campaigned against heavily by vested interests), and the NDIS which was also necessary but not even mentioned during the halcyon days of John Howard, even if Labor didn't get the finance right for any of these things at least we have their legacies (The Clean Energy Finance Corporation for one).

But yes, the current leaders are both nerds, they pander to the people who really control them, business and unions, and no-one truly represents the end consumer in the street.

Will it ever change ? We just have to keep tossing the tossers out until we get someone with a bit of vision.

I think one problem is that people with any skill won't go into politics a> because they can get paid more elsewhere and b> they don't want themselves and their families exposed to the constant media attention and harassment that an adversarial system continually engenders. I doubt if this will change unfortunately untill the political system itself changes.


----------



## Tisme (5 March 2017)

Smurf1976 said:


> Never before have I been more disappointed in them all and I suspect that a great many Australians would share that view.




Gee you're fair bit behind the times.

Without getting into partisan politics, I think the nation as a whole was given a great shock when it witnessed how outside forces, division and "Vlad the Impaler" wrecked the running of Labor govt(s). I think we are still in trauma and suffering an innate guilt at being part of it, albeit some with a Cheshire grin and/or grim determination not to take any ownership of the consequences.

Skewing Vlad, who promised much but delivered more division and derision instead, was supposed to be the penance of the Liberal Party to clear the stink of the past, but it hasn't worked.

IMO the rise in support for Pauline Hanson is because she offers three main opportunities:

1) a mouth piece to express our crudity, bigotry and anger at having no control over social engineering and bureaucracy;

2) to put a fox in the hen house and scare the majors into doing things magnificent rather than polarising;

and as one of my ex dyed on Liberal supporter mates stated in his implacable support of Pauline :

3)"I want to see her burn the place to the ground so we can start again"


----------



## SirRumpole (5 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> to put a fox in the hen house and scare the majors into doing things magnificent rather than polarising;




Yes, the magnificent things seem to be the Libs either trying to placate or villify Hanson alternately and neither seems to have worked so far. 

Hanson will split the Liberal vote like the Greens have split Labor, and the Libs will be driven further Right just as Labor have been driven Left by the Greens (silly 50% renewable energy target).

I'm sure many will be watching their heroines appearance on Insiders this morning. There is no doubt that she is becoming more relaxed and assured in media interviews lately. Should be interesting.


----------



## Tisme (5 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Hanson will split the Liberal vote




Yes the National Party should get in now with a coalition offer. Hanson + Nats + 1/3 Libs = 25% + 10% = 11% = 46% first preference


----------



## noco (5 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> True. However I would mention that R-G-R introduced innovations like the NBN ,  carbon tax (which was necessary but campaigned against heavily by vested interests), and the NDIS which was also necessary but not even mentioned during the halcyon days of John Howard, even if Labor didn't get the finance right for any of these things at least we have their legacies (The Clean Energy Finance Corporation for one).
> 
> But yes, the current leaders are both nerds, they pander to the people who really control them, business and unions, and no-one truly represents the end consumer in the street.
> 
> ...




That is easy to overcome......VOTE 1 for One Nation.


----------



## overhang (5 March 2017)

noco said:


> Ah said the unions, these poor people who are giving up their R and R on the weekends need to be compensated with penalty rates.......So they work for one boss Monday to Friday and a different boss on the weekends....This is when the weekend overtime came into play......Have they worked their 40 hours for the second boss?...NO....The unions have exploited the conditions of the mid 1900's and applied them to modern day living.
> 
> Can you see the picture I am painting?
> 
> ...




You seem to be insinuating that most people working weekends are working a 2nd job and subsequently working 40+ hours a week.  I would like to see some stats because I really question if that's the case, the ones that I see that are full time workers and work weekends for a different employer are low income workers anyway, you don't see many on 60k+ choosing to work weekends.  Whilst schools, most trade, most non retail businesses and the finance industry continue to work Monday to Friday then employees should be compensated for working weekends and being away from the majority who aren't required to work weekends.  If you took penalty rates away and asked people which days they would choose to work I don't think many would say Saturday and Sunday.


----------



## drsmith (5 March 2017)

Smurf1976 said:


> Our governments of all persuasions have failed us miserably in my view. Rudd, Gillard, Abbott, Turnbull. None of them come anywhere close to the sort of leadership we had in the past and so desperately need now.



Two of the above have shown it's much easier to be opposition leader than it is to be PM and the other two have been unable to unite their respective parties after toppling said PM's.

It's becoming increasingly evident that Malcolm Turnbull will need to show more character than the other three above and stand aside as PM at some point. I'm not sure though who would replace him as leader. Scott Morrison remains a good alternative in my view but is also damaged goods with the conservatives Tony Abbott in particular while Julie Bishop to me lacks sufficient presence in parliament.

Sadly, like Labor before it under Julia Gillard, the house of Liberal is ablaze.


----------



## Smurf1976 (5 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> Gee you're fair bit behind the times.




The leaders we had up until 20 or so years ago seemed to at least give the impression of trying to do something useful.

Hawke and Keating did quite a bit with an assortment of reforms and despite being Labor kept the unions reasonably sensible most of the time.

Hewson, whilst never PM, at least seemed pretty determined with his ideas and engaged in serious policy debate as leader of the Opposition at the time.

For that matter even the Greens. I don't agree with Bob Brown on many things but at least he stood up for what he believed in.

Since then we seem to have really lost the plot. About the only thing we seem to have achieved of any benefit at all is to insulate a few roofs although even that was seriously botched.

Unaffordable housing, unreliable power, uncompetitive at practically anything (even with iron ore we're losing market share to Brazil it seems) and on it goes. Meanwhile we can't even get a government, of any political persuasion, able to govern itself.

Whilst a good thing in itself I do think that having had a quarter century without a recession is part of the problem. It has all been too easy and there just hasn't been the pressure to actually lead the country in the right direction so long as the cash keeps rolling in. Same problem that many other countries with oil or other natural resources have had over the years.

I just find it truly ridiculous that we've had a massive boom in mining plus an unprecedented period of growth and yet we've managed to come out of that with record levels of debt, infrastructure that's falling apart and a stock market that's gone nowhere for a decade. If that's not a wasted opportunity then I don't know what is - we should have been able to fix pretty much anything that needed fixing with that backdrop.

I don't really care if it's Labor, Liberal or someone else. I just want a government with some real vision and the ability to get it done.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 March 2017)

Smurf1976 said:


> I don't really care if it's Labor, Liberal or someone else. I just want a government with some real vision and the ability to get it done.




Sadly we are also seeing a devaluation of science and research in some quarters.

Former PMs saying "climate change is crap", when the vast bulk of evidence says otherwise, and threats to defund institutions that don't tow the political line.

Throwing of standards out the window, handing TAFE over to dodgy private companies offering bogus courses, universities passing people because they are fee payers, dodgy materials, goods and workers accepted from overseas because they buy a lot of stuff from us; generally standards being sacrificed on the altar of commercialism and privatisation. A race to the bottom.


----------



## noco (5 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Former PMs saying "climate change is crap", when the vast bulk of evidence says otherwise, and threats to defund institutions that don't tow the political line.




Abbott was dead right, it is carp and the vast bulk of evidence you speak about is a conglomeration of false and manipulated  data asked for by the UN.

Go back to the appropriate thread and you will see lots of evidence of where NOAA,  NASA and the CSIRO have been proven to fiddle with this so call evidence you talk about....Even NOAA self confessed to the fiddle.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 March 2017)

noco said:


> Abbott was dead right, it is carp and the vast bulk of evidence you speak about is a conglomeration of false and manipulated data asked for by the UN.




BS.


----------



## noco (5 March 2017)

overhang said:


> You seem to be insinuating that most people working weekends are working a 2nd job and subsequently working 40+ hours a week.  I would like to see some stats because I really question if that's the case, the ones that I see that are full time workers and work weekends for a different employer are low income workers anyway, you don't see many on 60k+ choosing to work weekends.  Whilst schools, most trade, most non retail businesses and the finance industry continue to work Monday to Friday then employees should be compensated for working weekends and being away from the majority who aren't required to work weekends.  If you took penalty rates away and asked people which days they would choose to work I don't think many would say Saturday and Sunday.




It is a very complex situation and I cannot find any stats to satisfy your needs......There are plenty of scenarios to see on google......There are so many different circumstances which IMHO would be difficult to assess in general..

One case where this women had a heap of medical bills and stated she was well paid in her job but she needed the extra money to pay.

 Another case where a female works in a casual job Tuesday to Thursday and is paid for 24 hours work...She has Monday and Friday off but then works on the weekend on penalty rates and earns almost double of her week job.....She is more than happy.

But when you look at the overall picture, the unions strived to have the 40 hours per week reduced to 38 hours because they said  people need the extra time off to relax and now you see people wanting to work longer hours.......Then there was a recent case where some PS refused to work an extra 9 minutes per day.

Then you have a situation where Pauline Hanson on Insiders stated this morning where she was compelled to pay something like $32 per hour for workers on the weekends when McDonalds, through a union deal was allowed to pay a lot less.......I thought the unions once stated there should be equal pay for equal jobs....Then you have the case of the union deal done by Bill Shorten where he diddled the workers of Clean Event of $400,000,000 on penalty rates.....Perhaps we should have another Royal Commission into the rorting done by Bill Shorten, not forgetting the Chiquita case also.


----------



## noco (6 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> BS.




If you were to go to the appropriate thread, you will observe plenty of evidence of Climate Change fiddling.

Under Resisting climate hysteria, check out links to posts :-

8965
8977
8977
8979
8981
8980
9012

There is plenty more beyond the above.
Enjoy the reading.


----------



## Tisme (6 March 2017)

I must admit I pass the cost of penalty rates onto clients. The clients themselves generally make the decision to move activities to weekends.

The other issue about hospitality rates I have is that it's not unusual to see a surcharge on public holidays to cover the extra cost and it doesn't seem to stop bums on seats.

With any business, good planning based on product/service knowledge should result in both product placement and pricing to succeed in making profit. 

That restaurants close on a weekday (eg Tuesday) says heaps about when the actual busiest days are and that is probably Saturday and Sunday. Which, to me, means there must be a lot of people who don't work thus busting the myth that the weekend is no longer one for leisure.


----------



## pixel (6 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> I must admit I pass the cost of penalty rates onto clients. The clients themselves generally make the decision to move activities to weekends.
> 
> The other issue about hospitality rates I have is that it's not unusual to see a surcharge on public holidays to cover the extra cost and it doesn't seem to stop bums on seats.
> 
> ...



When I go to a restaurant - or any other place that's open for business at ungodly hours - I do so because I have a reason. I want to enjoy myself at this particular day/ time; I may have a budget for it, but the cost is of subordinate concern. 

To the owner of any such business I'd say, it's more important to have good staff who are smiling, attentive, and making sure that I get what I came for. If you can't afford to pay them regulation wages, if your business profit depends on your underpaying your staff, then you've set the wrong priorities, your business model is flawed, and you shouldn't be in business in the first place.

For those reasons, I believe the FWT got this one wrong. They were leaning towards small business owners whingeing that weekend penalty rates make them unprofitable and uncompetitive. That's BS. Their competitors have to work under the same rules, pay the same penalty rates. There is only so much cash in customers' pockets, and the customer will pick where to spend it. If a small biz doesn't make enough profit, the reason is either oversupply of similar offers in the same space, or insufficient quality and customer service driving the traffic elsewhere.

Customers don't owe you a living. You owe your customers the best service. Make sure your staff are happy to represent you in the best way, and _voila! _your boxes are ticked.


----------



## PZ99 (7 March 2017)

I'll give it 6 months after it's implemented. Watch what happens, business groups will be whinging about penalty rates again. That's what happened last time when Sunday rates were cut in 2014.



drsmith said:


> Sadly, like Labor before it under Julia Gillard, the house of Liberal is ablaze.



Yes it is but like the Gillard scenario it's not because of the leader, it's the right wingers destabilising the Govt by undermining the PM. 

I reckon Malcolm Turnbull should leave the Libs and stay on as an independent PM. LOL


----------



## Tisme (7 March 2017)

Michaelia Cash bought a property in Perth for $1.4m which was such a non event she forgot to declare it.

Josh Frydnberg considers it a minor event too. So far he isn't blaming Bill Shorten and Labor, but it's only a matter of time.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> Michaelia Cash bought a property in Perth for $1.4m which was such a non event she forgot to declare it.
> 
> Josh Frydnberg considers it a minor event too. So far he isn't blaming Bill Shorten and Labor, but it's only a matter of time.




In that case, following the precedent set by Ley, she should resign from the Cabinet.


----------



## noco (7 March 2017)

pixel said:


> When I go to a restaurant - or any other place that's open for business at ungodly hours - I do so because I have a reason. I want to enjoy myself at this particular day/ time; I may have a budget for it, but the cost is of subordinate concern.
> 
> To the owner of any such business I'd say, it's more important to have good staff who are smiling, attentive, and making sure that I get what I came for. If you can't afford to pay them regulation wages, if your business profit depends on your underpaying your staff, then you've set the wrong priorities, your business model is flawed, and you shouldn't be in business in the first place.
> 
> ...




MacDonalds, have a good union deal...They allowed to pay their staff a lot less than their competitors.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 March 2017)

Why the consumers deserve tax cuts more than business.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-...e-economy-when-we-stop-spending-money/8297724


----------



## PZ99 (7 March 2017)

Doesn't look like Mr Turnbull has a need to resign just yet.
Voters still have him at the top of the pack as the best person to lead the Liberals.

Malcolm Turnbull 20%
Julie Bishop 17% 
Tony Abbott 10%
Scott Morrison 2%
Christopher Pyne 2%
Peter Dutton 2%
"someone else"  18% 
"don't know"  28%
I'd give Scott Morrison a higher rating myself.
http://www.news.com.au/national/bre...s/news-story/ed1316a13599024b1b4358d97180caf4


----------



## pixel (7 March 2017)

Looking at those ratings, I'd give "Dont Know" the job. Make Someone Else the Deputy. Together, they should be doing a much better job than the current bunch of self-centred nincompoops.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 March 2017)

pixel said:


> Looking at those ratings, I'd give "Dont Know" the job. Make Someone Else the Deputy. Together, they should be doing a much better job than the current bunch of self-centred nincompoops.




Peter Dutton would probably get it after distribution of preferences from the "someone elses" and "don't cares".


----------



## Tisme (7 March 2017)

Senator Malcolm Roberts Twitter:=


“Indonesia is proof that Islam, democracy and moderation are compatible.” MT






























https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_female_genital_mutilation_by_country#Indonesia


----------



## sptrawler (7 March 2017)

I would suggest, with Tisme post, lets get Billy in and open the flood gates.lol


----------



## Tisme (7 March 2017)

sptrawler said:


> I would suggest, with Tisme post, lets get Billy in and open the flood gates.lol





Contrary to your family indoctrination, neither Malcolm nor Billy are sacred cows. You really need to get a grasp on the concept of  free thought and "objective" analysis otherwise it's going to eat you up everytime someone offends your misplaced loyalties. LOL LOL LOL ...enough lols?

You notice how I didn't go the crowd callout, just directed a comment straight at you?


----------



## sptrawler (7 March 2017)

Free thought should be shared with your alter ego, self promotion and backslapping, doesn't in itself make an argument.


----------



## Tisme (7 March 2017)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-...p-rejects-federal-gov-claims-blackout/8332384

'The Clean Energy Finance Corporation has rejected the Federal Government's claims that high renewable energy targets are a recipe for blackouts, telling an inquiry that "high levels of renewable penetration are technically feasible and consistent with maintaining energy security".


----------



## sptrawler (7 March 2017)

We`will see how that pans out, over the next few years, it will happen but not in my lifetime.
Somewhat like self driving cars and electric cars, they will happen, but don't hold your breath.lol
Technically going back to the moon should be easy, why haven't they done it, they said they would?


----------



## noco (7 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-...p-rejects-federal-gov-claims-blackout/8332384
> 
> 'The Clean Energy Finance Corporation has rejected the Federal Government's claims that high renewable energy targets are a recipe for blackouts, telling an inquiry that "high levels of renewable penetration are technically feasible and consistent with maintaining energy security".





So long as the wind keeps blowing or it does not blow too hard.


----------



## bellenuit (8 March 2017)

noco said:


> So long as the wind keeps blowing or it does not blow too hard.




Surely solar with battery is fast becoming a viable option. I know the longevity of the batteries is an issue, but that is improving at a fast rate AFAIK


----------



## Tisme (8 March 2017)

sptrawler said:


> We`will see how that pans out, over the next few years, it will happen but not in my lifetime.
> Somewhat like self driving cars and electric cars, they will happen, but don't hold your breath.lol
> Technically going back to the moon should be easy, why haven't they done it, they said they would?




I'm for state owned base load coal fired myself.


----------



## noco (8 March 2017)

bellenuit said:


> Surely solar with battery is fast becoming a viable option. I know the longevity of the batteries is an issue, but that is improving at a fast rate AFAIK




I believe enough battery storage to supply a whole city is a long way off and will be very costly.

What are they doing in the short term?


----------



## bellenuit (8 March 2017)

noco said:


> I believe enough battery storage to supply a whole city is a long way off and will be very costly.
> 
> What are they doing in the short term?




But do they need to do a whole city? In the US, there are several companies that power their factories exclusively from solar. As these come off the grid (or never go on the grid) and more and more homes go off the grid, then the existing base load infrastructure might be able to service the rest.


----------



## noco (8 March 2017)

bellenuit said:


> But do they need to do a whole city? In the US, there are several companies that power their factories exclusively from solar. As these come off the grid (or never go on the grid) and more and more homes go off the grid, then the existing base load infrastructure might be able to service the rest.




Off course they do.......If a city is reliant on Solar or wind with no batteries and the Sun don't shine or the wind doesn't blow, what then?...Lets not forget South Australia now and in the future without pie in the sky batteries.


----------



## bellenuit (8 March 2017)

noco said:


> Off course they do.......If a city is reliant on Solar or wind with no batteries and the Sun don't shine or the wind doesn't blow, what then?...Lets not forget South Australia now and in the future without pie in the sky batteries.




You are missing the point. All cities currently have non-renewable power sources so none are exclusively reliant on solar or wind. What I am suggesting is that solar with battery backup can be phased in to both cover new capacity and allow the gradual decommissioning of non-renewable power sources as they become uneconomic or obsolete. My response was in relation to your comment about what power would be available from renewables when the wind doesn't blow.

Significant reduction in power requirements can be achieved by those homes and businesses that can go off grid (solar plus battery) going off grid, incentives to use lower powered devices for everyone (though they probably don't need monetary incentives at this stage as they pay for themselves) and power usage pricing that helps load balancing.

I'm not suggesting dumping non-renewable sources all at once, but perhaps not replacing them when they have reached the ends of their useful lives and instead spending the dollars on solar and batteries (where it makes sense geographically). A target of 50% renewables doesn't seem unachievable, but over a longer time frame than the ALP proposes.


----------



## bellenuit (8 March 2017)

bellenuit said:


> I'm not suggesting dumping non-renewable sources all at once, but perhaps not replacing them when they have reached the ends of their useful lives and instead spending the dollars on solar and batteries (where it makes sense geographically). A target of 50% renewables doesn't seem unachievable, but over a longer time frame than the ALP proposes.




House by house, factory by factory we will get there.....

*Supplier Ibiden Commits to 100 Percent Renewable Energy For Apple Manufacturing
*
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/03/08/apple-supplier-ibiden-100-percent-renewable-energy/


----------



## noco (8 March 2017)

bellenuit said:


> You are missing the point. All cities currently have non-renewable power sources so none are exclusively reliant on solar or wind. What I am suggesting is that solar with battery backup can be phased in to both cover new capacity and allow the gradual decommissioning of non-renewable power sources as they become uneconomic or obsolete. My response was in relation to your comment about what power would be available from renewables when the wind doesn't blow.
> 
> Significant reduction in power requirements can be achieved by those homes and businesses that can go off grid (solar plus battery) going off grid, incentives to use lower powered devices for everyone (though they probably don't need monetary incentives at this stage as they pay for themselves) and power usage pricing that helps load balancing.
> 
> I'm not suggesting dumping non-renewable sources all at once, but perhaps not replacing them when they have reached the ends of their useful lives and instead spending the dollars on solar and batteries (where it makes sense geographically). A target of 50% renewables doesn't seem unachievable, but over a longer time frame than the ALP proposes.




According to Labor a target of 50% renewables will cost the tax payer $40 billion.

What about big business and cities, how will they be catered for if solar and wind fail?


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2017)

noco said:


> According to Labor a target of 50% renewables will cost the tax payer $40 billion.




And what will "clean" coal cost the taxpayer ?


----------



## noco (8 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> And what will "clean" coal cost the taxpayer ?




$5 to 6 billion for a 1600 mw plant the size of Halzelwood......Cheaper cost, more efficient and more reliable.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2017)

noco said:


> $5 to 6 billion for a 1600 mw plant the size of Halzelwood......Cheaper cost, more efficient and more reliable.




What is your source for that ?

Does it include carbon capture and storage ?


----------



## noco (8 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> What is your source for that ?
> 
> Does it include carbon capture and storage ?




You obviously have sleep at the wheel......That figure was derived and posted under the appropriate thread....It is all there for you see.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 March 2017)

noco said:


> You obviously have sleep at the wheel......That figure was derived and posted under the appropriate thread....It is all there for you see.




One power station isn't going to supply the whole country, so it's an invalid comparison.

If you are saying there should be no wind or solar, what's the estimate for an all coal grid ?


----------



## noco (8 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> One power station isn't going to supply the whole country, so it's an invalid comparison.
> 
> If you are saying there should be no wind or solar, what's the estimate for an all coal grid ?




Solar and wind isn't going to supply the whole country either so what is your point of comparison....BTW where did I say there should be no solar or wind generation?

Why be so difficult when with a little more effort you could be impossible.

We have wind and solar enforced on us whether we liked it or not......The cost to the consumer and to business in South Australia with increased cost of renewables will eventually close business and loss of jobs.......Watch what happens in SA this year ...more blackouts will come.......Jay Wetherill does not seem to have much confidence his renewables when he is suggesting to big business to install their own diesel power plants......He is encouraging more pollution going against the grain of his Green scheme.


----------



## bellenuit (8 March 2017)

noco said:


> According to Labor a target of 50% renewables will cost the tax payer $40 billion.
> 
> What about big business and cities, how will they be catered for if solar and wind fail?




I haven't mentioned wind so in relation to solar, how do you mean fail. How does solar / battery fail in a country that experiences some of the longest hours of sunshine per day, when the solar / battery installations are installed in individual households and enterprises. Failure, were it to occur, would be at the individual household / enterprise level and should have no impact on others in the immediate neighbourhood, unlike grid supplied power. The installation cost too is borne by the household and enterprise, unlike large grid based solar schemes. If you read what I said, you would see that existing non-renewable infrastructure is only decommissioned at the end of its useful life and we are only looking at a long term 50% renewable target.


----------



## sptrawler (8 March 2017)

bellenuit said:


> I haven't mentioned wind so in relation to solar, how do you mean fail. How does solar / battery fail in a country that experiences some of the longest hours of sunshine per day, when the solar / battery installations are installed in individual households and enterprises. Failure, were it to occur, would be at the individual household / enterprise level and should have no impact on others in the immediate neighbourhood, unlike grid supplied power. The installation cost too is borne by the household and enterprise, unlike large grid based solar schemes. If you read what I said, you would see that existing non-renewable infrastructure is only decommissioned at the end of its useful life and we are only looking at a long term 50% renewable target.




Well I will put this idea forward, if people put in batteries, they are no longer recipients of subsidies.
Then when after 7 years those batteries die, due to chemical degradation, why would they replace them?
When the capital cost, hasn't been paid off, with their power savings?
Then it is back onto the grid, what a complete stuff up.
I know several farmers, that have tried every conceivable renewable power supply, but when the grid gets close they hop on.


----------



## bellenuit (9 March 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Well I will put this idea forward, if people put in batteries, they are no longer recipients of subsidies.
> Then when after 7 years those batteries die, due to chemical degradation, why would they replace them?
> When the capital cost, hasn't been paid off, with their power savings?
> Then it is back onto the grid, what a complete stuff up.
> I know several farmers, that have tried every conceivable renewable power supply, but when the grid gets close they hop on.




But surely in 7 years the replacement cost of batteries will be significantly less than when initially installed if prices keep falling as they have up to now. One would also expect the technology to have advanced so that life expectancy is beyond 7 years.

Also, it wouldn't make sense to install batteries if you are currently the recipient of a FID subsidy, particularly those who got in on the 40c+ schemes. But once the FID reduces to a 7c rate or thereabouts, then would be the time to consider batteries.

One assumes that those businesses like Apple that are moving to all Solar have looked closely at the costs and though they may be willing to pay more than it currently costs, they are taking a long term view.


----------



## Tisme (10 March 2017)

This is probably Bill Shorten's fault for not doing anything for the 5 years he's been prime minister, but I'm not sure we should be encouraging foreign over local, especially in a State with a glut of electrical workers:


----------



## Junior (10 March 2017)

noco said:


> Junior said
> *The level of US military spending is abhorrent. 3x the amount China spends and equivalent to the total spend of the next 8 biggest spending nations combined (or up to the next 13 biggest, depending which stats you use).
> 
> Imagine what could be achieved with those funds if they halved spending, for example? Universal free/affordable healthcare would be easily achievable, for example.*
> ...




What did we get for it?  We live in a country with one of the highest living standards on the planet.  Low unemployment, high wages, low pollution and low crime rate (despite what the media would have you believe).  Also relatively, very low public debt to GDP ratio.


----------



## sptrawler (11 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> This is probably Bill Shorten's fault for not doing anything for the 5 years he's been prime minister, but I'm not sure we should be encouraging foreign over local, especially in a State with a glut of electrical workers:
> View attachment 70284




http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2013/06/27/glance-457-visa-holders-australia

Julia Gillard made the same claim, yet gave Gina the O.K to use 457 construction workers to build Roy Hill.

Let's look at a later analysis, from your favoured source the ABC.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-15/what-is-a-457-visa/8026280

Just shows the Labor Party have no morals, throw $hit when they are the worst perpetrators, shows how much leverage the media has to paint any picture they want.
The great corrupter of men is ego, the more they look in the mirror, the less they see the problems.


----------



## Tisme (11 March 2017)

sptrawler said:


> http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2013/06/27/glance-457-visa-holders-australia
> 
> Julia Gillard made the same claim, yet gave Gina the O.K to use 457 construction workers to build Roy Hill.
> 
> ...




Well OK it's Gillard's fault, not Bill's for the last five years of do nothing about protecting local jobs.... mea culpa

I agree that ego is a corruption of objectivity, as is hate, jealousy, intransigence, spite, bloody mindedness, ................


----------



## sptrawler (11 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> Well OK it's Gillard's fault, not Bill's for the last five years of do nothing about protecting local jobs.... mea culpa
> 
> I agree that ego is a corruption of objectivity, as is hate, jealousy, intransigence, spite, bloody mindedness, ................



Both sides of politics have used 457's, so IMO neither side can take the moral high ground, it's a national disgrace.


----------



## Smurf1976 (11 March 2017)

So far as comments concerning power, I'll leave those to the relevant thread but I'll just say this here.

You CAN have a grid based on 100% renewables just as you can have a grid based on 100% coal, 100% nuclear, 100% gas or 100% oil.

With the exception of hydro however, using only one source results in high costs when compared to the result achieved by combining multiple sources. That's because they all do some aspects of it well and some aspects of it badly.

Key point there is that it's not all the same. Hence why the concept that power stations with different characteristics were going to compete against each other hasn't worked out well at all. Engineers knew that from the start as did the tradies, operators and everyone else of a practical nature involved with it but the economic theorists are still scratching their heads wondering why it didn't work.

Keep the politicians right out of the way. Limit the economic types to things based on facts not theories that apply in a different context. Put the engineers in charge with the support of an assortment of scientists, geologists, trades and others of a practical nature and just get on with it. Problem fixed.

It would be better if the whole thing wasn't a political subject in the first place, politicians and technical things are almost always a bad mix. If it really must be political then keep that to broad concepts and costs but please keep them as far away from the technical stuff as possible because with very few exceptions they really don't grasp even the basics.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 March 2017)

Smurf1976 said:


> If it really must be political then keep that to broad concepts and costs but please keep them as far away from the technical stuff as possible because with very few exceptions they really don't grasp even the basics.




So what do you think of Musk's proposal ?

Will it solve SA's power problem as he says ?


----------



## Tisme (11 March 2017)

OUCH... ex Labor premier in charge

*"Bankers having a ball*

It’s the social event of the year: NAB boss *Andrew Thorburn *is hosting a debutante ball for incoming Australian Bankers’ Association boss *Anna Bligh *at his bank’s Sydney executive outpost.

The other star of the March 30 event will be *Steve Munchenberg*, the former NAB executive that Bligh will replace at the peak banking lobby at the start of next month.

Invitations have been sent to the various peaks of the Australian financial community. Unless there are exceptional personal circumstances, count on every bank CEO — CBA’s *Ian Narev*, ANZ’s *Shayne Elliott*, Westpac’s *Brian Hartzer *— all being along to welcome their high-profile recruit.

Reserve Bank of Australia governor *Philip Lowe*, ASIC boss *Greg Medcraft *and APRA boss *Wayne Byres *are also all expected to attend.

However, our mail suggests no members of *Malcolm Turnbull*’s Coalition have been invited.

After the tantrum many of them threw over the appointment of former Labor Queensland premier Bligh, that’s understandable.

It is also understood that Treasurer *Scott Morrison*’s former director of communications and strategy *Sasha Grebe *— who we revealed this week has just joined listed engineering and infrastructure management services outfit Downer Group — will not be attending."


----------



## SirRumpole (11 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> However, our mail suggests no members of *Malcolm Turnbull*’s Coalition have been invited.





What about newly appointed NAB exec Mike Baird I wonder ?


----------



## IFocus (12 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> So what do you think of Musk's proposal ?
> 
> Will it solve SA's power problem as he says ?




Smurf will likely correct me but the main issue is engineering and bad fault discrimination.

Having lots of base load at different locations helps overcome many engineering sins. 

The case prosecuted by LNP is a shocker technically.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 March 2017)

IFocus said:


> Smurf will likely correct me but the main issue is engineering and bad fault discrimination.
> 
> Having lots of base load at different locations helps overcome many engineering sins.
> 
> The case prosecuted by LNP is a shocker technically.




I'm not sure about batteries long term. They will always need replacing and they use some valuable and scarce metals these days. Recycling them may be possible but expensive.

I don't think you can beat pumped hydro storage long term for reliability, simplicity and low maintenance, even if it's going to take longer to build.

By the LNP case I think you mean "clean coal" ? If so I agree it's a shocker.


----------



## Tisme (12 March 2017)

I'm guessing Malcolm show ponying personal abuse at Bill and his (Bill's) melbourne billionaire mates in question time didn't cut through as consolidated votes for the Libs in WA


----------



## noco (12 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> I'm guessing Malcolm show ponying personal abuse at Bill and his (Bill's) melbourne billionaire mates in question time didn't cut through as consolidated votes for the Libs in WA




Perhaps a little off topic.

That is because it was mainly state issues in WA......High debt...high unemployment.....A decade of Barnett in office.....People just wanted a change whether for better or worse will find out sooner or later .


----------



## Tisme (12 March 2017)

noco said:


> That is because it was mainly state issues in WA......High debt...high unemployment.....A decade of Barnett in office.....People just wanted a change whether for better or worse will find out sooner or later .




It didn't help that the Newspapers and Channel 7 went positive for the Labor fella.


----------



## noco (12 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> It didn't help that the Newspapers and Channel 7 went positive for the Labor fella.




Yes Tisme, you are so right......Something I have been harping on for a long time....Green/Labor socialist coalition control the media (ABC and SBS) and preach their propaganda to the naïve....Channel 7 are blatantly biased towards the Labor Party.....Good to Labor and negative to the Liberals.....Don't you just love the way they go about things.

As Richo once said about the Labor Party, "WHAT EVER IT TAKES TO WIN" whether it be by fair or foul means.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 March 2017)

noco said:


> Yes Tisme, you are so right......Something I have been harping on for a long time....Green/Labor socialist coalition control the media (ABC and SBS) and preach their propaganda to the naïve....Channel 7 are blatantly biased towards the Labor Party.....Good to Labor and negative to the Liberals.....Don't you just love the way they go about things.
> 
> As Richo once said about the Labor Party, "WHAT EVER IT TAKES TO WIN" whether it be by fair or foul means.




LOL.

Murdoch will always go for the Libs untill its obvious that they can't win, and it would have been obvious to blind Freddy that Libs weren't going to win in WA.

Murdoch will then back the likely winners and claim the credit.

Cunning old codger.


----------



## noco (12 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> LOL.
> 
> Murdoch will always go for the Libs untill its obvious that they can't win, and it would have been obvious to blind Freddy that Libs weren't going to win in WA.
> 
> ...




Well, you are right in that it was a foregone conclusion that Barnett had no chance of winning given what he had stacked up against himself.
Labor may have lost WA but I believe you will see a change at the next election in SA and Vic.......You must confess Labor is on the nose in those two states.


----------



## Tisme (15 March 2017)

Jebus now Nick is giving Malcolm "Trumble" a hiding.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...r/news-story/6dc90c68c6775f0b6018181f71e4044a


----------



## Tisme (15 March 2017)

What would Michael Pascoe know about economics...he must be a fabianista:



*See Video* 

"First of all, the BCA would have us believe there is an international shortage of capital, that there is a war for it, that it is being rationed and Australia will not get any unless we tax foreign companies less.

The reality is that there is no shortage of capital – the world is awash with money looking for investment opportunities. There is so much capital sloshing around that several trillion dollars are sitting in government bonds with negative yields, guaranteed to lose money held to maturity.

What there is a shortage of is investment opportunities offering both security and opportunity. Security and opportunity happen to be things that Australia has plenty of. Throw in a relatively well-educated and adaptable workforce, a growing multicultural population, handy geography and rich natural resources and it's why foreign money keeps pouring into this country. "Australia is seen as safe haven for investors'' as international institutions compete for our commercial buildings, never mind the very real war bidding up the value of any infrastructure we care to put up for sale."


----------



## Tisme (16 March 2017)

Tell me I'm wrong, but does Malcolm seem to have a spring in his step and revitalised Cheshire grin since the WA election?

He's like a man with the weight lifted from him.


----------



## Tisme (16 March 2017)

Josh Frydenberg is trying to own South Australia's and Australia's renewables right now on the ABC.

Apparently Jay Weatherill's "World's First Virtual Power Plant" is worth the Federal govt backtracking while also trying to take credit for it. One of the reporters just put it to Josh that this is rather awkard LOL.

I want Jay in Canberra, he is destroying Josh !!!!


----------



## SirRumpole (16 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> Josh Frydenberg is trying to own South Australia's and Australia's renewables right now on the ABC.
> 
> Apparently Jay Weatherill's "World's First Virtual Power Plant" is worth the Federal govt backtracking while also trying to take credit for it. One of the reporters just put it to Josh that this is rather awkard LOL.




Watching that now. It all started off luvvy duvvy, but Wetherill is now sticking the knife into Fridenburg well and truly.


----------



## Tisme (16 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Watching that now. It all started off luvvy duvvy, but Wetherill is now sticking the knife into Fridenburg well and truly.





The stuff you only see a couple of times in a generation. I think the Libs just handed state govt to Labor for the next term.

A gutted Josh just blamed Labor, still waiting for Bill Shorten to be blamed.

Josh is dying in the 4rse, the voice is trembling he's gone and the reporters are onto it.


----------



## Tisme (21 March 2017)

Malcolm trying the fake news route

https://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/malcolm-trumpbull?utm_term=.vedNoRM5L#.urAgRlLX0


----------



## moXJO (21 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> Malcolm trying the fake news route
> 
> https://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/malcolm-trumpbull?utm_term=.vedNoRM5L#.urAgRlLX0



Fake news is correct.
Just because they costed the policy means stuff all. Journalist that go the step further and assume through personal bias should be shot. 
Also the misdirection that media uses. We had the case of Trump not shaking Merks hand. Who gives a fck, anyone actually remember anything of substance from their talk?  Or do we just look for circus moments now. The media is absolutely guilty of bad coverage,  power trips and opinions dressed up as facts.


----------



## Tisme (21 March 2017)

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/a-fai...dium=Email&utm_campaign=Worm-Subscribe-210317



> This demands Turnbull's replacement by the end of the year. Honourable members will use this fortnight's sittings to make subtle evaluations of likely contenders for the leadership. Nothing will be overt, no one's going to do anything silly, but the fix is in. That's because Turnbull won't be able to do anything to turn this horrible dynamic around – not without addressing the three central problems that have bedevilled every prime minister since the turn of the century.


----------



## moXJO (21 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> http://www.smh.com.au/comment/a-fai...dium=Email&utm_campaign=Worm-Subscribe-210317



A very good article.


----------



## sptrawler (21 March 2017)

Tisme said:


> http://www.smh.com.au/comment/a-fai...dium=Email&utm_campaign=Worm-Subscribe-210317




Good post Tisme.
Having Turnbull as the leader of the LNP, has only prolonged the agony Australia has to wear, the sooner an absolute landslide happens the better.IMO
This extended period of hung Parliaments, has to come to an end, it is just killing us slowly.


----------



## Tisme (22 March 2017)

Pollbludger questions Newscorp's 2% poll jump in LNP support after announcing a feasibility study in to Snowy upgrades:

"We are right now celebrating the fact that a feasibility study will be underway," Malcolm Turnbull



> 21 March 2017 The Essential Research fortnight rolling average result departs firmly from the Newspoll script in recording a two-point jump to Labor, who now lead the two-party preferred by 55-45. On the primary vote, the Coalition drops one to 34%, Labor is up one to 37%, One Nation is down one to 10% and the Greens are steady on 9%. Also from this survey:




https://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2017/03/21/essential-research-55-45-labor/


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2017)

Interesting move by the new Labor Premier of W.A, regarding the disproportionate allocation of GST.
Barnett jumped up and down about it for years, nobody backed him, great to see Mcgowan has now picked up the call.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-...olm-turnbull-to-get-a-backbone-on-gst/8376598


----------



## Tisme (23 March 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Interesting move by the new Labor Premier of W.A, regarding the disproportionate allocation of GST.
> Barnett jumped up and down about it for years, nobody backed him, great to see Mcgowan has now picked up the call.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-...olm-turnbull-to-get-a-backbone-on-gst/8376598




Pushing the traditional Wassie " them and us" buttons to please the masses or really going to do something?

You do know that Barnett caused that problem by trying to get more resource rent style money from miners and drillers, thinking no one would figure it in the GST equalisation formula? The Feds always punish impudent state premiers who think they are higher up the food chain than they are.


----------



## Tisme (28 March 2017)

I see the $50bn dollar company tax bill is coming up for the vote. I'm guessing the only gains from this will be better imputation concessions for overseas shareholders, the idea being to attract more foreign investment? Local shareholders will pay more income tax because the franking credits will be further away from the marginal tax rate?


----------



## sptrawler (28 March 2017)

Well I personally think it has worked, Labor and the media got Turnbull in the 'Big Chair', now he is thrashing around like a chook without a head.
Noco said it, I said it, all the sensible LNP supporters said it.
Why they got rid of Abbott, is beyond belief. They would have lost the election, but would have been re elected for an eternity.IMO
It's a shame Australia plays the short game, rather than the long view.


----------



## Tisme (3 April 2017)

First out of the gates now penalty rates have been penalised:

http://www.news.com.au/finance/bill...r/news-story/21bb2c176d529532929714bbfdd10ef6


----------



## moXJO (3 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> First out of the gates now penalty rates have been penalised:
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/finance/bill...r/news-story/21bb2c176d529532929714bbfdd10ef6



Asians and Indians are working for about $5 an hour in some industries. He should get out more.


----------



## Tisme (4 April 2017)

moXJO said:


> Asians and Indians are working for about $5 an hour in some industries. He should get out more.




Yes 711 will become the peak body of modern Australian industry and labour reform in a few short years. 

Can only hope new arrivals will wake up to the reason their origins of poverty, deprivation, war, suppression, etc are because they didn't have the dolichocephalic headed Anglo/Nordic/Gaelic/Saxon founding fathers the true western nations have and need to have for continued industrious prosperity.

Unfortunately British secular law and parliamentarianism is being watered down in this and the other four centres of shangri-la civilisation (USA, Canada, UK and NZ) by self immolating do gooders (probably sectarian foreigners) in favour of the barbarians at the gate.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> dolichocephalic




We learn something new every day.


----------



## luutzu (4 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Yes 711 will become the peak body of modern Australian industry and labour reform in a few short years.
> 
> Can only hope new arrivals will wake up to the reason their origins of poverty, deprivation, war, suppression, etc are because they didn't have the dolichocephalic headed Anglo/Nordic/Gaelic/Saxon founding fathers the true western nations have and need to have for continued industrious prosperity.
> 
> Unfortunately British secular law and parliamentarianism is being watered down in this and the other four centres of shangri-la civilisation (USA, Canada, UK and NZ) by self immolating do gooders (probably sectarian foreigners) in favour of the barbarians at the gate.





Oh, so it's the dolichocephalic head is it?

Most would have thought it's gunpowder and the willingness to use it that was the cause.


----------



## Tisme (4 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> Oh, so it's the dolichocephalic head is it?
> 
> Most would have thought it's gunpowder and the willingness to use it that was the cause.




None of us asked to be constructed as the uber modern of the species, so don't even think about starting up on me for being a Homo evolutis trapped in a see of inferior homo sapiens and homo erectus'.


----------



## luutzu (4 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> None of us asked to be constructed as the uber modern of the species, so don't even think about starting up on me for being a Homo evolutis trapped in a see of inferior homo sapiens and homo erectus'.




History have shown that whenever you Homo Evolutis feel trapped among the seas of barbarians, you have ways and means of emptying it. Draining the swamp, as Trump would say 

Not that funny I guess.


----------



## Tisme (4 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> History have shown that whenever you Homo Evolutis feel trapped among the seas of barbarians, you have ways and means of emptying it. Draining the swamp, as Trump would say
> 
> Not that funny I guess.





Yeah we are pretty good at cleaning house, but not a patch on Pol Pot.


----------



## luutzu (4 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Yeah we are pretty good at cleaning house, but not a patch on Pol Pot.




Your own house or other people's "empty" house(s)? hehe

Yea, Pol Pot was one nasty cleaner. Though the VCs did put a stop to him. But don't thank them too quick as they definitely did it to take over the place too. Ended up putting their own man in power, so that's close enough I guess.

Then there's Imperial Japan... killing some 30 million Chinese? Dam.

Seem those who say they're superior are the victor who write then read their own history, or something.


----------



## overhang (4 April 2017)

sptrawler said:


> It's a shame Australia plays the short game, rather than the long view.




Strange comment to make when giving what seems to be endorsement to an Abbott lead government.  The same government that had/have a short sited view of the NBN, the same government that had short sited energy polices.


----------



## overhang (4 April 2017)

Economic management, what economic management. 



> "If you go down to the pub and talk to small business people, they're not talking about econometric models," he said.
> 
> "The Government doesn't need to be convinced about the need to give small and medium-sized businesses a tax cut.
> 
> "The Turnbull Government knows how business works, we focus on the things we know make a difference because of our life experience and our background in business."




Yes no need for economic models when we have the Libs who can just base policy on life experience, may as well shut treasury down with these experts in charge.   The scary thing is this isn't some backbencher, this is the treasurer.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-...rovide-economic-modelling-company-tax/8414338


----------



## SirRumpole (4 April 2017)

overhang said:


> Economic management, what economic management.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




What a Muppet. 

Business tax cuts are a sop to his corporate mates.

Did they ever model giving a tax cut to low and middle income earners who will then spend the money in the economy, thereby generating demand for goods and services thereby increasing employment ?

The trickle down economic policy is rubbish. Business can produce what ever it likes , but if people can't afford to buy it then all you end up with is a lot of stock on the shelves.


----------



## Tisme (4 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> Seem those who say they're superior are the victor who write then read their own history, or something.




Yes, definitely an unseamly spectacle for those who "know" they are superior....... and we made our country great without sniffing dried dear penis, without feng shui, without claiming every invention there ever was as a pre christian oriental innovation, etc


----------



## luutzu (4 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Yes, definitely an unseamly spectacle for those who "know" they are superior....... and we made our country great without sniffing dried dear penis, without feng shui, without claiming every invention there ever was as a pre christian oriental innovation, etc




Who sniffs dried deer penis? Come on McGee, we all know it's Rhino tusks and bear gall bladder that does the trick. There are no snake oil salesman in the West? True, there used to be. They now sell Neo-Liberal, trickle down economic now don't they?

Feng Shui was actually quite scientific. It's the architectural art of designing a home that live in harmony with nature. Such as knowing where the sun rises and set, know that the (ant)arctic wind is cold and so placing less windows north, build high wall barrier north while south facing elevation are for living areas and garden beds etc. - reverse this when you conquer the southern hemisphere 

That kind of sensibility eventually led to voodoo charlatans so what can they do about it. 

The Chinese did invent a whole lot of stuff. Some claims... who knows. But it's not like they're the only ones who think they've always been unified and civilised and secular and scientific and democratic and noble and it's all due to good Christian value and longer head structure.

btw, they also invented face-reading


----------



## Tisme (4 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> btw, they also invented face-reading




of course they did.. that and penicillan probably


----------



## luutzu (4 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> of course they did.. that and penicillan probably




No not penicillin. Some Brit accidentally discovered that, and generously gave it away. So that's one to the West 

But growing up, I did watch a lot of HK martial arts series and they did know about using poison to treat poison, that and flying. So from that I gathered they know about immunisation. Though to be honest, the Arab Muslims did discover immunisation back before they're all terrorists barbarian savages as some of us believe.


OK, seriously now... There really is no need to put other races and culture down to elevate our own civilisation, is there?

We all have our good, our bad and our ugly. Just as the Taoist first observed and symbolises in its Yin/Yang "fish logo" thousands of years ago


----------



## Tisme (5 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> OK, seriously now... There really is no need to put other races and culture down to elevate our own civilisation, is there?




I think it's important to put a mirror to those superstitious and servile civilisations that are fast becoming ghettos and sweatshops for the pleasure and leisure of industrious. It's also important that we don't slow evolution by gluing progress to devolving and stagnant cultures.


----------



## moXJO (5 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> We all have our good, our bad and our ugly. Just as the Taoist first observed and symbolises in its Yin/Yang "fish logo" thousands of years ago



I thought bogans invented that for tacky tattoos.

Noticed Morrison is going to crack down on the black economy. Thats pretty much how overseas students survive, so it will be interesting to see the repercussions if the kill that cash cow. Also a lot of Asian businesses reliant on student labor. Yes they shouldn't be doing it,  but personally I think libs is going to f.uck Australia right in the a$$


----------



## luutzu (5 April 2017)

moXJO said:


> I thought bogans invented that for tacky tattoos.
> 
> Noticed Morrison is going to crack down on the black economy. Thats pretty much how overseas students survive, so it will be interesting to see the repercussions if the kill that cash cow. Also a lot of Asian businesses reliant on student labor. Yes they shouldn't be doing it,  but personally I think libs is going to f.uck Australia right in the a$$




Yin Yang is Chinese. Taoist school of thought about the duality of everything. How light and darkness complement each other, that without light we cannot know what is dark; without goodness we cannot know what is evil... a bunch of stuff like that. But I don't know much 'cause was more focused on the kung fu fighting. 

Morrison would get more bang for his (our?) buck if he focus on the daylight robberies large corporations are getting away with. But I guess you got to pick your battles and who better to pick on then small time crooks without a lobby.


----------



## Tisme (5 April 2017)

moXJO said:


> I thought bogans invented that for tacky tattoos.




He's baiting you. The Ichthys (anagram for "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour")  symbol is a christian one based on Greek lingo and he knows it.


----------



## luutzu (5 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> I think it's important to put a mirror to those superstitious and servile civilisations that are fast becoming ghettos and sweatshops for the pleasure and leisure of industrious. It's also important that we don't slow evolution by gluing progress to devolving and stagnant cultures.




One man's "industrious" entrepreneur is another country's exploiter and colonialist.

The Chinese was also first in calling other cultures bad names too. That there's nothing to learn or want from the White barbarians beside their gold and silver. Then soon enough the devils figured opium sells better... eventually causing one of the world's longest, relatively continuous empire to collapse and became the sick man of Asia.

There's a few lessons there.


----------



## luutzu (5 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> He's baiting you. The Ichthys (anagram for "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour")  symbol is a christian one based on Greek lingo and he knows it.




me baiting? Seriously was referring to the yinyang fishes.


----------



## sptrawler (5 April 2017)

Trying to drag it back on topic.

https://thewest.com.au/opinion/paul...-of-was-wealth-reeks-of-marxism-ng-b88436112z

Is there any wonder West Aussies are annoyed with Turnbull, he's full of it.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 April 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Trying to drag it back on topic.
> 
> https://thewest.com.au/opinion/paul...-of-was-wealth-reeks-of-marxism-ng-b88436112z
> 
> Is there any wonder West Aussies are annoyed with Turnbull, he's full of it.




I actually think that the State system is archaic, defined by in most cases artificial borders and delineating little Empires with their own little Emperors.

The entire population of WA is 2.5 million, about half that of Sydney alone and for that they deserve State status and first divs on all the resources that they happen to be sitting on ?

Get real please, we are all one country and the money has to go where the people are.


----------



## sptrawler (5 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I actually think that the State system is archaic, defined by in most cases artificial borders and delineating little Empires with their own little Emperors.
> 
> The entire population of WA is 2.5 million, about half that of Sydney alone and for that they deserve State status and first divs on all the resources that they happen to be sitting on ?
> 
> Get real please, we are all one country and the money has to go where the people are.



So it is all about population, regardless of the physical size of the area the population is spread over, seems a bit one dimensional.
Maybe a look at a map of Australia might help. Victoria's population is confined to a very small area, therefore logics would explain that it would be cheaper and easier to supply services.
Granted the services would be larger, but that doesn't give a proportional increase in cost.

Supplying water, sewage treatment, electricity, Government services and road infrastructure to a State the size of W.A, has very little to do with population size, maybe a reality check is required all round.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 April 2017)

Economic modelling is great...oops no it isn't says Morrison.



Muppett.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-...boost-economic-growth-richard-denniss/8422578


----------



## Tisme (7 April 2017)

sptrawler said:


> So it is all about population, regardless of the physical size of the area the population is spread over, seems a bit one dimensional.
> Maybe a look at a map of Australia might help. Victoria's population is confined to a very small area, therefore logics would explain that it would be cheaper and easier to supply services.
> Granted the services would be larger, but that doesn't give a proportional increase in cost.
> 
> Supplying water, sewage treatment, electricity, Government services and road infrastructure to a State the size of W.A, has very little to do with population size, maybe a reality check is required all round.




Seen QLD lately?


----------



## Logique (10 April 2017)

The Turnbull government looks 'gonski'.

Big swings in the NSW by-elections.  Over 50s are deserting the coalition.  Mightily peeved superannuants group with the recent changes.


----------



## Tisme (10 April 2017)

Logique said:


> The Turnbull government looks 'gonski'.
> 
> Big swings in the NSW by-elections.  Over 50s are deserting the coalition.  Mightily peeved superannuants group with the recent changes.




Yeah and demands by his peers to ramp up personal attacks on Shorten is only ever going to make Malcolm look like the mouse that roared. He's just not comfortable wearing battle fatigues.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 April 2017)

Another knife into the Morrison muppet on negative gearing.



*Negative gearing reform 'essential' to improve housing affordability: Saul Eslake*



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-...-must-include-negative-gearing-eslake/8430482


----------



## Tisme (10 April 2017)

Who's Ray Hadley?


----------



## SirRumpole (10 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Who's Ray Hadley?




One of them redneck right wing shock jock dudes who sit in their comfortable studios telling people what to think on salaries of $2.5 mill plus.


----------



## Tisme (10 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> One of them redneck right wing shock jock dudes who sit in their comfortable studios telling people what to think on salaries of $2.5 mill plus.





Oh, because he has divorced the treasurer today... a lovers tiff I think


----------



## moXJO (10 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Another knife into the Morrison muppet on negative gearing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Eslake has his finger in his ar.se. It's a supply issue. Otherwise it won't change house prices but still jack up rents.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 April 2017)

moXJO said:


> Eslake has his finger in his ar.se. It's a supply issue. Otherwise it won't change house prices but still jack up rents.




Yes it is a supply issue, and the supply for owner occupiers will increase if investors leave the market.


----------



## sptrawler (10 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Seen QLD lately?




Yes it is 1.85 m/klm2 and W.A is 2.65m/klm2.
Queensland has less than double W.A's population, yet apparently gets a disproportionate gst handout.
So your point was? 
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-...lower-than-forecast-budget-in-trouble/8384344


----------



## Tisme (10 April 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Yes it is 1.85 m/klm2 and W.A is 2.65m/klm2.
> Queensland has less than double W.A's population, yet apparently gets a disproportionate gst handout.
> So your point was?
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-...lower-than-forecast-budget-in-trouble/8384344





You looked at the population distribution?


----------



## SirRumpole (10 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Oh, because he has divorced the treasurer today... a lovers tiff I think




It's more because even Right Wing rednecks can recognise muppets when they see them.


----------



## moXJO (10 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes it is a supply issue, and the supply for owner occupiers will increase if investors leave the market.



And who are renters going to rent from.


----------



## luutzu (10 April 2017)

moXJO said:


> And who are renters going to rent from.




Isn't that "rising rent" just a distraction? I mean, the proposed solution aims to lower property prices, will it do that? It definitely would. So what does "rising rent" got to do with it?

And that's assuming that rent will rise. How will rent rise? 

For one, if property prices are lowered where first home buyers can afford their own house... that will take away the demand for rental properties. Lower demand generally mean lower prices.

Second, if property prices are lowered, property investor does not need to increase the rent and would still get the same or higher rental yield. 

Most importantly, aren't we supposed to be in love with free market and self-reliance and hardwork and all that? So what's with these welfare cheques to property investors in the form of capital gains reduction, negative gearing and all that?

If we're to cut a welfare cheque to anyone, shouldn't it be for politicians and poor people, first and second?


----------



## moXJO (10 April 2017)

luutzu said:


> Isn't that "rising rent" just a distraction? I mean, the proposed solution aims to lower property prices, will it do that? It definitely would. So what does "rising rent" got to do with it?
> 
> And that's assuming that rent will rise. How will rent rise?
> 
> ...



You need to slow immigration for negative gearing tinkering to work. Otherwise overseas investors will still buy regardless. So prices ain't dropping for long. 
Investor costs would increase so rents get jacked. I don't see them imposing negative gearing changes on current investors -who would raise rents regardless. 

We should be giving opportunities for the poor to get ahead,  but for those that truly want it. The others will be poor no matter how much you throw at them.


----------



## moXJO (10 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> It's more because even Right Wing rednecks can recognise muppets when they see them.



I wonder if he is actually getting it right?
Because both left and right thinks he sucks.


----------



## luutzu (10 April 2017)

moXJO said:


> You need to slow immigration for negative gearing tinkering to work. Otherwise overseas investors will still buy regardless. So prices ain't dropping for long.
> Investor costs would increase so rents get jacked. I don't see them imposing negative gearing changes on current investors -who would raise rents regardless.
> 
> We should be giving opportunities for the poor to get ahead,  but for those that truly want it. The others will be poor no matter how much you throw at them.




If the gov't level the playing field for investors and first home buyer - say, no tax breaks, no negative gearing to ease negative yield for investors. Then home buyers are more willing to outbid investors for the simple reason that the "return" they get from having a home of their own, from not having to move and unsettle the kids schooling or job prospects... those gains would mean the buyer/occupier would outbid investors.

But if investors with a couple of properties already under their belt, and especially if any of those are positively returning income, it's more advantageous for them to "invest" in another property to be "tax efficient", waiting for the market to rise then offload.

I thought all people want to get ahead. The poor ones might not want to get ahead, but wouldn't getting in the game be alright anyhow?


----------



## Tisme (18 April 2017)

457 Visa to be scrapped at urging of Pauline Hanson by twisting the LNP's arm ....hooray we don't have to learn Indian as a second language ...perhaps

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-18/government-abolishing-457-visas/8450310


----------



## moXJO (18 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> 457 Visa to be scrapped at urging of Pauline Hanson by twisting the LNP's arm ....hooray we don't have to learn Indian as a second language ...perhaps
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-18/government-abolishing-457-visas/8450310



Poms were taking advantage of it as well.
Abbott was talking about slowing immigration till housing can cope.


----------



## Tisme (18 April 2017)

moXJO said:


> Poms were taking advantage of it as well.
> Abbott was talking about slowing immigration till housing can cope.





Here's the lad in his natural environment:

http://www.2gb.com/podcast/tony-abbott-9/


----------



## SirRumpole (20 April 2017)

Why the Libs won't do anything about negative gearing.



*Housing affordability: Australia's politicians among nation's most aggressive investors*



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-...isions-made-by-big-property-investors/8454978


----------



## Tisme (20 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Why the Libs won't do anything about negative gearing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I think you will find a very large proportion are over renumerated public servants salary sacrificing too.

My attitude is, as a public servant,  if you can salary sacrifice and live comfortably on subsequent cash flow, own an investment property then the taxpayer salary given you by your govt boss is too high; given you already have an over the top super top up, you don't have to think outside the square just do the job to set procedure and you more or less have a job for life.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> I think you will find a very large proportion are over renumerated public servants salary sacrificing too.
> 
> My attitude is, as a public servant,  if you can salary sacrifice and live comfortably on subsequent cash flow, own an investment property then the taxpayer salary given you by your govt boss is too high; given you already have an over the top super top up, you don't have to think outside the square just do the job to set procedure and you more or less have a job for life.




Yes, I think you are right there about public servants. The government goes on about nurses and police using NG, they must be getting paid pretty well if they can afford an investment property as well as their own home.


----------



## Tisme (20 April 2017)

After listening to Malcolm today I have come to realise his as nauseum complaints about Bill Shorten's poor performance are probably true.

Bill Shorten is surely the worst Prime Minister this country has never elected to run the show. There you go I said it, I have taken a partisan stance alongside Malcolm.


----------



## Tisme (21 April 2017)

More unfair attacks on Malcolm:


----------



## noco (21 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> More unfair attacks on Malcolm:
> 
> View attachment 70771




I thought Shorten was the past master at cutting wages......Need I remind you of the way Shorten duded the workers of Chiquita and Clean Event and the low wages he organized for Mac Donalds with 457 visas.


----------



## Tisme (21 April 2017)

noco said:


> I thought Shorten was the past master at cutting wages......Need I remind you of the way Shorten duded the workers of Chiquita and Clean Event and the low wages he organized for Mac Donalds with 457 visas.





Yeah but Shorten isn't the boss is he. Your argument is like blaming your next door neighbour for the poor condition of your house.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 April 2017)

noco said:


> I thought Shorten was the past master at cutting wages......Need I remind you of the way Shorten duded the workers of Chiquita and Clean Event and the low wages he organized for Mac Donalds with 457 visas.




And if he got a big increase for the workers you would be rubbishing him for screwing the bosses.

There's no pleasing some people.


----------



## noco (21 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Yeah but Shorten isn't the boss is he. Your argument is like blaming your next door neighbour for the poor condition of your house.




I don't follow your rhetoric again and how that relates....It does not make any sense.


----------



## noco (21 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> And if he got a big increase for the workers you would be rubbishing him for screwing the bosses.
> 
> There's no pleasing some people.




What increase did he get for the workers?......He screwed companies left,right and center to fill the coffers of the AWU at the expense of workers.


----------



## Tisme (21 April 2017)

noco said:


> I don't follow your rhetoric again and how that relates....It does not make any sense.





I didn't think it would.

I really don't know how to simplify it any more than I have. 

You do understand that Malcolm is the man in charge and that Bill is merely the "opposition" leader? That things that happen under Malcolm's Captains watch is his responsibility and accountability? If you don't you will never understand and that marks you poorly in  cognitive ability apparently.


----------



## Tisme (21 April 2017)

noco said:


> What increase did he get for the workers?......He screwed companies left,right and center to fill the coffers of the AWU at the expense of workers.





You weren't there, I wasn't there, the commission found nothing, the workers were happy, the suits were happy, the only ones unhappy were the LNP witch hunters and the Tricoteuses like yourself.


----------



## noco (21 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> I didn't think it would.
> 
> I really don't know how to simplify it any more than I have.
> 
> You do understand that Malcolm is the man in charge and that Bill is merely the "opposition" leader? That things that happen under Malcolm's Captains watch is his responsibility and accountability? If you don't you will never understand and that marks you poorly in  cognitive ability apparently.




 Do you understand how far left Turnbull is and how much he is in cohoots wit Labor......Of course you would not have a clue how evil Turnbull is.


----------



## noco (21 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> You weren't there, I wasn't there, the commission found nothing, the workers were happy, the suits were happy, the only ones unhappy were the LNP witch hunters and the Tricoteuses like yourself.




Tisme get up to date from what came out of the RC.....100 conviction and 1000 offenses.....$40 grand undisclosed by Shorten.
OFF TOPIC


----------



## Tisme (21 April 2017)

noco said:


> Do you understand how far left Turnbull is and how much he is in cohoots wit Labor......Of course you would not have a clue how evil Turnbull is.





Malcolm's trying to do something at last ... don't put the mockers him now Tony has body snatched him.  Once we get rid of all the undesirables coming here we can ditch him for something better.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 April 2017)

noco said:


> Do you understand how far left Turnbull is and how much he is in cohoots wit Labor......Of course you would not have a clue how evil Turnbull is.




You realise that if it wasn't for Turnbull campaigning for Abbott, Abbott would have lost his seat at the last election ?

http://www.news.com.au/national/pol...n/news-story/b3dab19f9532c009d2221c505266bac3

Tony Abbott is a popular as a fox in a hen house and Turnbull is holding him up. A funny way for Tony to say thanks, by continually white anting Turnbull.


----------



## moXJO (21 April 2017)

GST on ebay and other auction/seller sites seems like a nightmare to govern. God only knows that the idiots in public service will make a dogs breakfast out of it.  Is there anything the government won't impose a tax on, or legislate with another idiot rule on.
This country is going to sh.it with the amount of fees, taxs and laws that they impose on everything.


----------



## noco (21 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> You realise that if it wasn't for Turnbull campaigning for Abbott, Abbott would have lost his seat at the last election ?
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/national/pol...n/news-story/b3dab19f9532c009d2221c505266bac3
> 
> Tony Abbott is a popular as a fox in a hen house and Turnbull is holding him up. A funny way for Tony to say thanks, by continually white anting Turnbull.




Hey Rumpy, politics is a dirty game to be playing and no matter what side of politics you favour, it is dog eat dog......Who has the loudest bark and the worst bite generally comes out on top with the other dog who loses running  off with his tail between his legs.

Abbott will never be PM again and Turnbull should resign for taking the Liberals too far to the left....I believe all Abbott is trying to do is swing Turnbull back to the true Liberal conservatism.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 April 2017)

noco said:


> Hey Rumpy, politics is a dirty game to be playing and no matter what side of politics you favour, it is dog eat dog......Who has the loudest bark and the worst bite generally comes out on top with the other dog who loses running  off with his tail between his legs.
> 
> Abbott will never be PM again and Turnbull should resign for taking the Liberals too far to the left....I believe all Abbott is trying to do is swing Turnbull back to the true Liberal conservatism.




Well right now Labor is looking a united party while the Libs are still having civil wars and Barnaby blunders away with trying to pork barrell his electorate by moving departments to Armidale. Half the staff have resigned apparently and the rest have to work out of MacDonalds.

What a dill Barnaby is.


----------



## noco (21 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Well right now Labor is looking a united party while the Libs are still having civil wars and Barnaby blunders away with trying to pork barrell his electorate by moving departments to Armidale. Half the staff have resigned apparently and the rest have to work out of MacDonalds.
> 
> What a dill Barnaby is.




Do you really believe the Labor Party are united?

It would appear that way according to the polls but they have there internal problems which we do not hear about purely because of fear, the favorable media support from the ABC  and they do not have to do anything while the Liberal Party transforms itself from the current chaos.

The Labor Party may sit on their hands for too long and become complacent.


----------



## sptrawler (21 April 2017)

moXJO said:


> GST on ebay and other auction/seller sites seems like a nightmare to govern. God only knows that the idiots in public service will make a dogs breakfast out of it.  Is there anything the government won't impose a tax on, or legislate with another idiot rule on.
> This country is going to sh.it with the amount of fees, taxs and laws that they impose on everything.




It is really funny, because the government was wedged by Hardly Normal, the media and Labor a couple of years ago, all ranting about the unfair advantage overseas sellers have by not paying GST.
The Government said at the time, it is too costly and inefficient to administer on purchases less than $1,000, the ranting continued the Government relented, now they cop the flack as though it was their idea. lol


----------



## sptrawler (21 April 2017)

Another weird twist, Labor are saying they will stop SMSF borrowing to purchase houses, to improve the affordability.
That is really weird because from memory, it was under the Gillard Government that SMSF were given the go ahead to borrow and buy houses, we on the forum thought it was a bad idea.
Now those who opened the floodgates with it, are claiming the accolades for suggesting it shouldn't be allowed, as it pushes up house prices.
Why do politicians feel they are distrusted, maybe because they contradict themselves and rely on the electorate having no memory


----------



## moXJO (22 April 2017)

sptrawler said:


> It is really funny, because the government was wedged by Hardly Normal, the media and Labor a couple of years ago, all ranting about the unfair advantage overseas sellers have by not paying GST.
> The Government said at the time, it is too costly and inefficient to administer on purchases less than $1,000, the ranting continued the Government relented, now they cop the flack as though it was their idea. lol



Labor made a lot of this mess. You can guarantee that their policies will damage the country more. Shorten is possibly the biggest idiot in politics today and no amount of "polish" coaching will help.
Labors front bench is terrible and their policies are populist cr.ap
Gerry Harvey can eat it as well.


----------



## Tisme (22 April 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Why do politicians feel they are distrusted, maybe because they contradict themselves and rely on the electorate having no memory




Recalibrating based on prevailing conditions?


----------



## SirRumpole (22 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Recalibrating based on prevailing conditions?




Of course, if the facts change you change your opinions.


----------



## Tisme (22 April 2017)

moXJO said:


> Labor made a lot of this mess. You can guarantee that their policies will damage the country more. Shorten is possibly the biggest idiot in politics today and no amount of "polish" coaching will help.
> Labors front bench is terrible and their policies are populist cr.ap
> Gerry Harvey can eat it as well.




Labor in power really concerns me, not so much Bill, but the real social engineers who have ethnic, gender, sexual and hurt feelings much higher up their ladders of imperative than national cohesion, nation building,  national pride, assimilation, etc.....you know who they are... the ones who got bums on seats because of equal opportunity policy rather than merit to do what core works parliaments should do.

Wong, Tanya, etc will have us all apologising for being imperfect Utopians and pinging us with new rules of engagement and insincere guilt.

I do not agree Bill is anywhere near an idiot. He is is highly intelligent man and should be respected for that even if he does barrack for a different team.


----------



## Tisme (22 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Of course, if the facts change you change your opinions.




If only voters would heed their own calls for change and vote for what's needed in the national interest for the next 3 years. But if your'e welded onto e.g. Collingwood it's a harder habit to break than cigarettes and alcohol it seems... I suspect it's the deluding brain confusing brand loyalty with common sense.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> Labor in power really concerns me, not so much Bill, but the real social engineers who have ethnic, gender, sexual and hurt feelings much higher up their ladders of imperative than national cohesion, nation building, national pride, assimilation, etc.....you know who they are... the ones who got bums on seats because of equal opportunity policy rather than merit to do what core works parliaments should do.




I agree completely but sometimes you have to take the rough with the smooth and go with the mob that offers the best overall benefits.

Frankly I'm not inclined to go with a Party whose sole economic policy is to give tax cuts and tax dodges to their mates and say "stuff you" to everyone else even if that mean a tradeoff for a bit of social engineering as much as that makes me vomit.

I don't give either major party my preference these days, maybe Hanson's rise will give Labor the idea that the public have had a gutfull of minority pandering and will push it into the background and will concentrate on economic equality rather than minority feather bedding.

Let's hope so.


----------



## noco (22 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> You realise that if it wasn't for Turnbull campaigning for Abbott, Abbott would have lost his seat at the last election ?
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/national/pol...n/news-story/b3dab19f9532c009d2221c505266bac3
> 
> Tony Abbott is a popular as a fox in a hen house and Turnbull is holding him up. A funny way for Tony to say thanks, by continually white anting Turnbull.




http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...e/news-story/de6f82a31aad1495604b98bbfc4908de


----------



## moXJO (23 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> I do not agree Bill is anywhere near an idiot. He is is highly intelligent man and should be respected for that even if he does barrack for a different team.



You have to be joking. The guy got the job on union backing.
Sly and putting on a front is not a sign of intelligence. I've met the guy and intelligent isn't the word I'd use. He is a social ladder climber, doing what he has to out of ambition. He has a team around him to tell him what to say,  how to say it and what to do.


----------



## Tisme (23 April 2017)

moXJO said:


> You have to be joking. The guy got the job on union backing.
> Sly and putting on a front is not a sign of intelligence. I've met the guy and intelligent isn't the word I'd use. He is a social ladder climber, doing what he has to out of ambition. He has a team around him to tell him what to say,  how to say it and what to do.




You obviously don't know how the Labor party works.... if you are an Anglo Male you don't just walk in off the street like the LNP .... however if you are naturally gifted as a lesbian, an artisan, a woman (especially a failed female lawyer or ex sports star), a non christian, non Anglo Male in any way, shape or form then the pathway is as easy as the handicapped entrance into a footy match. 

In the face of such a melee, Bill has to be a formidable man ... even the LNP Govt blames him for everything that happens, that's how much respect they have for him and his abilities to govern from the opposition benches.


----------



## moXJO (23 April 2017)

Considering he has blocked all the savings measures even some he was once for. But then let policies that restrict our privacy and freedom through. I'd say its more of the same.


----------



## Tisme (23 April 2017)

moXJO said:


> Considering he has blocked all the savings measures even some he was once for. But then let policies that restrict our privacy and freedom through. I'd say its more of the same.





You didn't see Malcolm bragging how all the measures they wanted through have got through the other day?


----------



## moXJO (23 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> You didn't see Malcolm bragging how all the measures they wanted through have got through the other day?



I think he is a shtbag as well. All the measures he got through were basically screwing us over one way or another.
There were a few good things,  but also a lot of stuff that puts us all further under the thumb.


----------



## Tisme (29 April 2017)

http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2017/04/27/liberal-party-insider-speaks-out/



> _“The Turnbull government is at war with the people. This is a government which hates their own constituents. The Liberal Party has lost touch with what it stands for and will be decimated unless it changes tack. Across the next electoral cycle the Liberals will lose power federally and in every state with the exception, perhaps, of Tasmania.”_
> 
> Those are not the words of the opposition, but of one of the Liberal Party’s leading strategists of the past 20 years.
> 
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (29 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2017/04/27/liberal-party-insider-speaks-out/




Fair comment. Tax cuts and lurks for the mates, sod all for everyone else.


----------



## orr (29 April 2017)

Tisme said:


> http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2017/04/27/liberal-party-insider-speaks-out/




Does the Liberal Parties constituency want what Abetz, Christainson and the rest of what the god bothering right want to give them?
Does the fact that no Financier on the planet will back Adarni with as much as brass razoo... But this government want to give it a Billion of your money; possibly give reason for concern?
A ruined and ruinous NBN, what is going on... let me guess 'Murde'och'
And as far as Morrison is concerned? where do you even start...
Petrolium rent... just LNG Qatars $26.4 billion in 2022 v Aust $800 million when we export more. Morrison wont touch it... boggles the mind.
Emissions trading... Every Business group wants it... From these dullards nothing.
Neg Gearing, Capital gains concessions ... For the betterment of the budget.  nothing .

Nothings going to save 'em'. because they are no good....And They hate a lot more than just their constituents.


----------



## Tisme (30 April 2017)

orr said:


> Does the Liberal Parties constituency want what Abetz, Christainson and the rest of what the god bothering right want to give them?
> Does the fact that no Financier on the planet will back Adarni with as much as brass razoo... But this government want to give it a Billion of your money; possibly give reason for concern?
> A ruined and ruinous NBN, what is going on... let me guess 'Murde'och'
> And as far as Morrison is concerned? where do you even start...
> ...




It's a conundrum. The 8% rising debt and seemingly insoluble extra  $100bn this year and the half a trillion dollar total debt is very concerning from so called fiscal and economic managers. I can only think the money is flowing into Melbourne and Sydney fueling the housing price demand and thus propping up a Claytons GDP.

I don't think they have a clue quite frankly, with the total focus being on blaming everyone else for their own failures.

It's our fault of course, We gave this lot a free pass based on punishing the Gillard/Rudd mob and we didn't put any caveats and boundaries in place...we expected adult behaviour from a bunch of kids really IMO.


----------



## noco (30 April 2017)

orr said:


> Does the Liberal Parties constituency want what Abetz, Christainson and the rest of what the god bothering right want to give them?
> Does the fact that no Financier on the planet will back Adarni with as much as brass razoo... But this government want to give it a Billion of your money; possibly give reason for concern?
> A ruined and ruinous NBN, what is going on... let me guess 'Murde'och'
> And as far as Morrison is concerned? where do you even start...
> ...





Qatar Government, over 50% investment in the infrastructure of gas...

Australian Government 0% investment in the infrastructure of gas.

This is where the difference comes in as I explained in detail in a previous post.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 April 2017)

noco said:


> Qatar Government, over 50% investment in the infrastructure of gas...
> 
> Australian Government 0% investment in the infrastructure of gas.
> 
> This is where the difference comes in as I explained in detail in a previous post.




Australian citizens = 100% ownership of gas.

Foreign companies = 0% ownership of gas.


----------



## Ferret (30 April 2017)

noco said:


> Qatar Government, over 50% investment in the infrastructure of gas...
> 
> Australian Government 0% investment in the infrastructure of gas.
> 
> This is where the difference comes in as I explained in detail in a previous post.



Is it ok if I come around and start digging up your backyard and selling the soil? 
I'll pay for the shovels


----------



## qldfrog (30 April 2017)

Ferret said:


> Is it ok if I come around and start digging up your backyard and selling the soil?
> I'll pay for the shovels



I am afraid the above is the current situation in Qld, you could add: move away you are a nuisance to my construction team, i make a buckload of money, pay hardly any tax and definitively nothing to you!!!
Your tax will pay to fix..one day the mess i leave behind, but expect to leave with that crap from no on..wonder why the farmers want to "shut the gate"??


----------



## qldfrog (30 April 2017)

qldfrog said:


> leave



live..my mistake


----------



## noco (30 April 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Australian citizens = 100% ownership of gas.
> 
> Foreign companies = 0% ownership of gas.




If you invest in a project like gas you should receive a good return......No investnment no return.....The state government profit from royalties and the Federal Government profits from income tax.


----------



## noco (30 April 2017)

Ferret said:


> Is it ok if I come around and start digging up your backyard and selling the soil?
> I'll pay for the shovels




Ferret, I hope this link helps you to understand how the CSG exploration operates.

Where CGS wells are drilled on private property, the land owner receives compensation of between $1500 and $3000 per well.

Similar to wind farms which is around $8000 per mill.



http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliam...Library/pubs/rp/rp1314/QG/ResourceDevelopment


----------



## noco (30 April 2017)

qldfrog said:


> I am afraid the above is the current situation in Qld, you could add: move away you are a nuisance to my construction team, i make a buckload of money, pay hardly any tax and definitively nothing to you!!!
> Your tax will pay to fix..one day the mess i leave behind, but expect to leave with that crap from no on..wonder why the farmers want to "shut the gate"??




In most cases the farmer wants to lock the gates because he is producing food for human consumption which is covered in the link I have just posted for Ferret.

Food for production to live stock falls into a different category.

https://www.crikey.com.au/2012/02/20/land-use-and-csg-what-rights-do-property-owners-have/


----------



## Jorgensen (30 April 2017)

noco said:


> If you invest in a project like gas you should receive a good return......No investnment no return.....The state government profit from royalties and the Federal Government profits from income tax.



Do you know how Norway got a trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund?If you don't I will be pleased to tell you.


----------



## noco (30 April 2017)

Jorgensen said:


> Do you know how Norway got a trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund?If you don't I will be pleased to tell you.




https://qz.com/971930/trumps-100-da...mises-in-a-contract-with-the-american-people/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_wealth_fund

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24049876


----------



## Tisme (1 May 2017)

Gas investment

https://www.austrade.gov.au/Article...nt-opportunities-in-Aust-oil-and-gas.pdf.aspx


----------



## Jorgensen (1 May 2017)

How did Norway get a windfall from their oil and gas in the North Sea?The UK did not prosper nearly as well.
Norway were fortunate to have an adviser that had worked for the Anglo-Iranian oil company.He knew the figures and how much they could tax oil companies and still not deter investment.And so they proceeded on "insider information".This has resulted in a sovereign wealth fund benefiting the whole population.
Australia is happy to accept the scraps from the table.


----------



## qldfrog (1 May 2017)

noco said:


> Ferret, I hope this link helps you to understand how the CSG exploration operates.
> 
> Where CGS wells are drilled on private property, the land owner receives compensation of between $1500 and $3000 per well.
> 
> ...



varies based on states as I think to remember 
basically, at best the price of one cow per well..to put things into perspective , 
and i have no doubt a well affects a farm negatively by more than a cow worth considering traffic, access, drilling, salt water toxic ponds etc etc.I really believe australian law should recognise underground resources, then owners of the land could share 9and so be more willing) the benefits
but as aussies we still have no right, yet have a puppet human right commission caring about colour gender or sexual preference.,, And we criticise China?


----------



## luutzu (1 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> 457 Visa to be scrapped at urging of Pauline Hanson by twisting the LNP's arm ....hooray we don't have to learn Indian as a second language ...perhaps
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-18/government-abolishing-457-visas/8450310




Or Pompie (proper) English.

Man we really do import senior and mid-level managers from Britain into Australia. The blue collar tradesman we kinda import them but send them to China 'cause we don't do much of any manufacturing here either.


----------



## Ferret (1 May 2017)

noco said:


> Ferret, I hope this link helps you to understand how the CSG exploration operates.
> 
> Where CGS wells are drilled on private property, the land owner receives compensation of between $1500 and $3000 per well.
> 
> ...



So, if I pay you a pittance of an access fee, I can have your soil?


----------



## noco (1 May 2017)

Ferret said:


> So, if I pay you a pittance of an access fee, I can have your soil?




Mate, there is nothing in the soil in my back yard except clay and shale...I am on the side of a mountain 300' above sea level.....You will need more than a pick and shovel.
Did you not read the laws and regulations on State and Federal legislation? 
You just keep coming up with these silly quotes about digging up my back yard....By the time you went through all the red tape you would have given up a long time ago.......Please give me a sensible post for discussion instead of this grade 3 talk.


----------



## Ferret (1 May 2017)

noco said:


> Mate, there is nothing in the soil in my back yard except clay and shale...I am on the side of a mountain 300' above sea level.....You will need more than a pick and shovel.
> Did you not read the laws and regulations on State and Federal legislation?
> You just keep coming up with these silly quotes about digging up my back yard....By the time you went through all the red tape you would have given up a long time ago.......Please give me a sensible post for discussion instead of this grade 3 talk.



I've tried to keep it simple for you, Noco.  I think you understand, you are just choosing not to acknowledge it.


----------



## noco (1 May 2017)

Ferret said:


> I've tried to keep it simple for you, Noco.  I think you understand, you are just choosing not to acknowledge it.




Only simple Simon would choose those kind of words.....What am supposed to acknowledge?

A stupid question will always attract some criticism....Your question does even relate to the debate.


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2017)

What's the latest net debt amount compared to when Gillard/Rudd left the books to Abbott?


----------



## noco (2 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> What's the latest net debt amount compared to when Gillard/Rudd left the books to Abbott?




Do your own home work and don't be so lazy.


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2017)

noco said:


> Do your own home work and don't be so lazy.




Too painful to contemplate for you?


----------



## sptrawler (2 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> It's a conundrum. The 8% rising debt and seemingly insoluble extra  $100bn this year and the half a trillion dollar total debt is very concerning from so called fiscal and economic managers. I can only think the money is flowing into Melbourne and Sydney fueling the housing price demand and thus propping up a Claytons GDP.
> 
> I don't think they have a clue quite frankly, with the total focus being on blaming everyone else for their own failures.
> 
> It's our fault of course, We gave this lot a free pass based on punishing the Gillard/Rudd mob and we didn't put any caveats and boundaries in place...we expected adult behaviour from a bunch of kids really IMO.




I'm beginning to lean your way, in W.A the newly elected Labor Government is going to cut the public service hugely, if the Liberals had tried it the CFMEU and the other heavies would have been all over the t.v marching on Parliament.
Now that Labor have announced it not a peep.lol

All we hear in in the media in W.A at the moment, is what a $hit deal we are getting with GST, when Barnett said anything about it over the last eight years, he was told to shut up and man up .lol

When there is a Liberal suggestion of putting in a pipeline to pump gas from W.A to Moomba, that would help ensure supplies to the Eastern States and help develop interior regions, we get told it is ridiculous because it would cost $9billion.

Yet it was really sensible to upgrade the internet in Australia, for $80billion, because The muppets said it would be good for you. When in reality all it is about is data collection and the ability to have the general public pay for t.v, which they currently get for free.

It never ceases to amaze me, the fervor people can have , for something that works to their detriment.
But then again that is how the Tobacco industry and fast food industry work, so I guess it is a proven formula, get the media onside and the rest is easy.
Not so much a rant, as a statement, from someone who is fed up with trying to highlight the fact Labor have nothing but self interest at heart.IMO


----------



## basilio (2 May 2017)

*So Gonski 2 is back with a twist and double somersault!.*

PM Malcolm Turnball has decided to turn on the tap for public education and review and reduce the funding for the most high priced Private schools to help balance the system.

IMO this is huge deal.  Puts Labour well and truly on the defensive and finally tackles the charade of $30k a year  Private schools using taxpayers money for second and third swimming pools. Be interesting to see if Malcolm can hold the line on reducing funds to the elite schools.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/fed...-to-know-about-gonski-20-20170502-gvxct7.html

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/fed...vernment-redirects-funds-20170502-gvxknc.html


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2017)

sptrawler said:


> I'm beginning to lean your way, in W.A the newly elected Labor Government is going to cut the public service hugely, if the Liberals had tried it the CFMEU and the other heavies would have been all over the t.v marching on Parliament.
> Now that Labor have announced it not a peep.lol
> 
> All we hear in in the media in W.A at the moment, is what a $hit deal we are getting with GST, when Barnett said anything about it over the last eight years, he was told to shut up and man up .lol
> ...




Yes sometimes the means to the end takes a snaking path.

I'm pleased you are being open minded about the machinations of polar politics. I have known Premiers from both sides in WA and I can tell you self interest is not owned by one persuasion.


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2017)

Debt prior Abbott ~$250bn 
Debt now ~$470bn


----------



## sptrawler (2 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> Yes sometimes the means to the end takes a snaking path.
> 
> I'm pleased you are being open minded about the machinations of polar politics. I have known Premiers from both sides in WA and I can tell you self interest is not owned by one persuasion.




Yes I agree, a highly respected W.A Union President, I worked for thought Barnett was the only W.A politician with a brain.
So there you go.lol


----------



## SirRumpole (3 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> Debt prior Abbott ~$250bn
> Debt now ~$470bn




Yes, but it's all Labor's fault. 

Where are they getting the money for a company tax cut, submarines, pumped storage , F35's etc ?

Low and middle income earners are shuddering in their boots before the budget wondering where the axe will fall.


----------



## Tisme (3 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, but it's all Labor's fault.
> 
> Where are they getting the money for a company tax cut, submarines, pumped storage , F35's etc ?
> 
> Low and middle income earners are shuddering in their boots before the budget wondering where the axe will fall.




You answered your own question in the opening sentence. In our eagerness to rid ourselves of Rudd/Gillard we accepted the subsequent nonsense that whatever the new boys spent, the debt would belong to our previous masters.........we gave them an open cheque with no oversight.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> You answered your own question in the opening sentence. In our eagerness to rid ourselves of Rudd/Gillard we accepted the subsequent nonsense that whatever the new boys spent, the debt would belong to our previous masters.........we gave them an open cheque with no oversight.




Thanks to the Greens who abolished the debt ceiling when Hockey was Treasurer.

That really shows that the Greens and LNP are the big spenders not Labor.


----------



## Tisme (3 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Thanks to the Greens who abolished the debt ceiling when Hockey was Treasurer.
> 
> That really shows that the Greens and LNP are the big spenders not Labor.




Huge spenders when you consider the promise was to reverse Labor's drunken debt through congenital economic management that only the LNP possesses.

I think it's about time for a PS cleanout and closing the doors on a fair few of their departments. 

Maybe some talent in the govt ranks wouldn't go astray either.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> I think it's about time for a PS cleanout and closing the doors on a fair few of their departments.




The HRC can go for starters.


----------



## Tisme (3 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The HRC can go for starters.




That can't happen because it would be discrimination.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 May 2017)

First the LNP take credit for the NBN, then NDIS and now Gonski, none of which were ever mentioned under the 11 years of Howard's rule.

The LNP are cheap rip off artists, with no ideas of their own except gifts for the mates.


----------



## Tisme (3 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> First the LNP take credit for the NBN, then NDIS and now Gonski, none of which were ever mentioned under the 11 years of Howard's rule.
> 
> The LNP are cheap rip off artists, with no ideas of their own except gifts for the mates.





They are "conservatives" afterall.

It has to be rather difficult coming up with alternatives when Labor advances every permutation as policy in advance then pick the ones the want.


----------



## Tisme (4 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The HRC can go for starters.



Interesting railing against the elite getting awards:



> *CHRIS KENNY Australian*
> 
> Giving the Voltaire award to Gillian Triggs is an act of evil genius that completely deforms the meaning of the French philosopher’s most famous edict.
> 
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (4 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> Interesting railing against the elite getting awards:




Another Voltaire quote that may be relevant to the HRC.

_"I am sitting in the smallest room in the house. I have your letter in front of me. Soon it will be behind me".

_

Sorry, actually that was Max Reger. Still a good quote though.


----------



## Tisme (8 May 2017)

Isn't it about time that the PBS, Medicare and Pensions be stripped from LNP voters to set the example of how to fix the socialism that is destroying our country since Federation? It's a risk to old Blue Ribbon people, but it's a risk I'm prepared for them to take if only to take away the burden of their hypocrisy.

http://www.9news.com.au/National/20...-Trump-on-successful-vote-to-repeal-Obamacare


----------



## Tisme (8 May 2017)

Spoiler



more family than formal



*'Brian Trumbull' the latest butchering of Malcolm Turnbull's name during US visit with Trump*



By
Mark Saunokonoko

Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/national/20...uring-us-visit-with-trump#AgMKJafdhC3qbQ77.99


----------



## SirRumpole (8 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> Isn't it about time that the PBS, Medicare and Pensions be stripped from LNP voters to set the example of how to fix the socialism that is destroying our country since Federation? It's a risk to old Blue Ribbon people, but it's a risk I'm prepared for them to take if only to take away the burden of their hypocrisy.
> 
> http://www.9news.com.au/National/20...-Trump-on-successful-vote-to-repeal-Obamacare




An open go to Shorten in Parliament surely ?

Question to the Prime Minister : "as the Prime minister congratulated President Trump on repealing the Obamacare act, does he intend doing the same with Medicare" ?

Surely the police would have to investigate that question.


----------



## noco (8 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> An open go to Shorten in Parliament surely ?
> 
> Question to the Prime Minister : "as the Prime minister congratulated President Trump on repealing the Obamacare act, does he intend doing the same with Medicare" ?
> 
> Surely the police would have to investigate that question.




You are becoming more like Junior...You go to the sublime to the ridiculous.......You probably don't know if Trump has something more efficient than Obama Care........For all you know he might even like our Medicare where 1.5% to 2 % is taken out of workers wages.....The Liberal Government does not have any intentions of selling Medicare so stop the Mediscare rubbish....That is old hat and well and truly gone down the sewer wit a lot of other Labor crap.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 May 2017)

noco said:


> You are becoming more like Junior...You go to the sublime to the ridiculous.......You probably don't know if Trump has something more efficient than Obama Care........For all you know he might even like our Medicare where 1.5% to 2 % is taken out of workers wages.....The Liberal Government does not have any intentions of selling Medicare so stop the Mediscare rubbish....That is old hat and well and truly gone down the sewer wit a lot of other Labor crap.




LOL, seems like I touched a raw nerve there.


----------



## Tisme (9 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> LOL, seems like I touched a raw nerve there.




I'm not sure if you are seeing the irony of Fontenelle's idiom being used against you.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> I'm not sure if you are seeing the irony of Fontenelle's idiom being used against you.




I expected no less from our old mate.


----------



## Logique (10 May 2017)

The biggest winner from the Budget is Bill Shorten.  Because a lot of Coalition voters will think, why bother to vote Coalition when we just get Labor policies anyway?


----------



## SirRumpole (10 May 2017)

Logique said:


> The biggest winner from the Budget is Bill Shorten.  Because a lot of Coalition voters will think, why bother to vote Coalition when we just get Labor policies anyway?




Exactly.


----------



## PZ99 (10 May 2017)

But.... Coalition voters won't vote Labor. They'll vote for the Coalition - even if it's by proxy through One Nation/Conservatives. Same way Labor voters go for the Greens. More to the point - people don't want Bill Shorten as PM. They prefer Malcolm Turnbull and have done since the election. Labor's vote in that election was the second lowest on record.

Howard battlers Swinging voters like myself aren't going to vote Labor unless their policies are _better_ than the Govt's. However, Labor's gaffes over the last week have been real doozies


----------



## Tisme (10 May 2017)

LNP leaving the incoming Labor govt with a big black hole.

Govt has effectively admitted defeat and turned from projecting A. Pope's parsimonious Cotta persona to celebrating debt loving Champagne Charlies.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 May 2017)

PZ99 said:


> But.... Coalition voters won't vote Labor. They'll vote for the Coalition - even if it's by proxy through One Nation/Conservatives. Same way Labor voters go for the Greens. More to the point - people don't want Bill Shorten as PM. They prefer Malcolm Turnbull and have done since the election. Labor's vote in that election was the second lowest on record.
> 
> Howard battlers Swinging voters like myself aren't going to vote Labor unless their policies are _better_ than the Govt's. However, Labor's gaffes over the last week have been real doozies




The only Labor gaffe has been that silly ad, which will privately appeal to a lot of people anyway.

The LNP implements a housing plan that most experts think is a stupid idea, putting super towards a house deposit, and ignore a plan that most experts think is a good idea, reforming negative gearing and CGT. So in that respect Labor's policies ARE better. 

The business tax cut is a joke, giving money to companies whose profits have increased. That money should go to consumers who will spend it in the economy, give income to business and everyone will be better off.


----------



## boofhead (10 May 2017)

I am not a fan of previously flagged use of super for purchasing a house but the way this policy is setup for saving a deposit has some merit. Deposit accounts in a low interest environment is sometimes less than inflation. Super has better earnings and better taxation. As long as there is a way to differentiate it from regular super. Maybe in time govts encourage more money to be saved via using super and a push to use more super savings for national public/private infrastructure.


----------



## PZ99 (10 May 2017)

When banks are passing on taxes and increasing interest rates unilaterally I think it's better to allow minimal access to super for the purpose of assisting with weekly repayments because it's that money that dictates whether you keep your house or not.


----------



## Junior (10 May 2017)

A few thoughts.


For first home buyers, the strategy can be valuable....you will get decent tax savings by salary sacrificing for a few years and then pulling the money back out.

The vast majority of young people will have their super in a default investment option....likely in a growth strategy.  So if you pump extra cash into super for 2 or 3 years, and this happens to be during a time of poor market performance, your tax breaks will be eroded by capital losses, thereby offsetting any benefits.

Of course, if markets move higher over this period, the benefits will be amplified.

You will pay buy/sell costs on the way into super, and on the way out.  The super fund will often charge you a withdrawal fee as well (I can see some funds increasing this to try and profit).

There will be an additional compliance burden where the ATO has to calculate out how much you can withdraw, and enforce that the funds are used for a first home purchase.
Simply scaling back Neg gearing/CGT discount would be far more effective, and would raise government revenue rather than being an expense.  Nevertheless, FHB should take advantage of this offer, if it becomes legislated.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (10 May 2017)

Mal needs to cut back on the *earnest emphasis* on *every *other *word*.  It's *almost *like he's *trying *to *convince *himself.  Belies a lack of faith.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 May 2017)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Mal needs to cut back on the *earnest emphasis* on *every *other *word*.  It's *almost *like he's *trying *to *convince *himself.  Belies a lack of faith.




He thinks he's back in court trying to convince the jury that his guilty as sin client is an angel.


----------



## Tisme (10 May 2017)

QANDA 8th May 2017 :

DAN TEHAN (Minister for Veterans' Affairs):

"So, Virginia, the *first thing* you have to do to start repaying the debt is to *get your budget back in surplus.* That is *the first thing you need to do*. And so, what you will see in tomorrow night’s Budget is us showing the path for our budget back to surplus. And once you can do that, then you can start paying back the debt. We’ve already paid off $22 billion of debt, we’re $22 billions of savings since the last election. And you will see us deliver a pathway back to surplus. Then we can start addressing the debt. But until you can get your balance sheet right, you won’t be able to do that. And as we’ve seen, previously, it’s always been a Coalition Government which is able to balance the budget and repay the debt."

Of course Scott Morrison (treasurer) is going to have a surplus within the perpetual 4 years (tomorrow never comes adage).

This is the *first thing* Dan didn't know when he acted like he did:

http://www.budget.gov.au/2016-17/content/bp1/html/bp1_bs6.htm


----------



## moXJO (10 May 2017)

Negative gearing tinkering won't do jack. We need investors to develop and build as much as possible. Foreign investment changes will have a bigger impact to price. 
The budget is very socialist flavored. But probably what we need for right now. Its the most sensible in a long time. Libs are as far center as the have been for a while


----------



## drsmith (10 May 2017)

The government's big bank levy will apply to deposits over $250k according to the following AFR article.

http://www.afr.com/business/banking...-to-consumers-market-analysts-20170509-gw124y

If the government guarantee is just fattening bank profits, then to the extent it overcomes that, fair enough. Anything beyond that stinks.


----------



## Knobby22 (11 May 2017)

drsmith said:


> The government's big bank levy will apply to deposits over $250k according to the following AFR article.
> 
> http://www.afr.com/business/banking...-to-consumers-market-analysts-20170509-gw124y
> 
> If the government guarantee is just fattening bank profits, then to the extent it overcomes that, fair enough. Anything beyond that stinks.



Yes, but also evens up the banking landscape. I bet the big banks wish they had Labor with a Royal commission now. They would rather be embarrassed than have the effect on the bottom line. I think it is a clever tax, the danger is that future governments will increase it as a politician cannot help but love new revenue streams. Overall the government tax hikes were very clever. I am more worried with what they do with the money. Wasting it like giving FOXTEL money to show unwatched sports is one bad idea. ( I wonder what Rupert said to Malcolm when he was with him recently at the Trump meeting).


----------



## McLovin (11 May 2017)

Junior said:


> Simply scaling back Neg gearing/CGT discount would be far more effective, and would raise government revenue rather than being an expense.  Nevertheless, FHB should take advantage of this offer, if it becomes legislated.




But that would upset the golden generation. The bank tax will probably end up being a tax on mortgages so I can't see how it will improve affordability, and allowing access to a tax concessionary environment to save for a deposit seems like it will have similar consequences to FHBG that just pushed up prices. Wealthy retirees are being given a carrot to downsize ($300k can be tipped into a tax free environment) rather than a stick – downsize or we will treat $x value of your home as reducing pension payments or increasing tax on super in pension phase. That seems to be the trend though, can't upset the baby boomers they've had it tough all their life! 

The Medicare levy doesn't come close to paying for Medicare, so why the pretence that you can fund the NDIS using that tax?

High speed rail along the corridors of the major capitals (not linking them) would do more to improve affordability than all these piecemeal ideas, but that requires vision beyond the forward estimates.


----------



## Junior (11 May 2017)

McLovin said:


> High speed rail along the corridors of the major capitals (not linking them) would do more to improve affordability than all these piecemeal ideas, but that requires vision beyond the forward estimates.




Agreed.  The benefits to something like this would be huge.  Anyone who has travelled Japan by train can see this.  Wherever a new stop is built....a city develops around the train station.  In Australia we could ease the burden on Melbourne/Sydney/Brisbane by creating new cities along a high speed network linking the 3.  It won't happen anytime soon under our current style of leadership, it's nice to dream though.


----------



## PZ99 (11 May 2017)

That rail line has been a dream for 30+ years. Land in far west NSW was sold and subdivided in anticipation of the line around 15 years ago. Another dream was a super highway linking the Badgerys Creek airport to this line around Parkes or Dubbo off memory.


----------



## Tisme (16 May 2017)

So I made a joke about 457s in the armed forces and now the govt is going to employ 457s to build the new navy ships !!!! 

Apparently we don't have workers who can ply their trade.


----------



## noco (16 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> So I made a joke about 457s in the armed forces and now the govt is going to employ 457s to build the new navy ships !!!!
> 
> Apparently we don't have workers who can ply their trade.




The Labor Party never built a ship in Adelaide during their 6 year term....Most likely those skilled  guys went into other industries and have been lost for ever.


----------



## Tisme (16 May 2017)

noco said:


> The Labor Party never built a ship in Adelaide during their 6 year term....Most likely those skilled  guys went into other industries and have been lost for ever.





Do you think that's true and if so why would the govt sink money into SA to save jobs when the skilled labour resource it was meant to preserve didn't exist in the first place?

Personally I smell a rat coming out of the bilges of the recent trade talks with India.


----------



## noco (16 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> Do you think that's true and if so why would the govt sink money into SA to save jobs when the skilled labour resource it was meant to preserve didn't exist in the first place?
> 
> Personally I smell a rat coming out of the bilges of the recent trade talks with India.




This 2017......Those skilled workers were dumped by the Labor Party 2007/2013.

Is it any wonder now we may have to bring in skilled workers from over seas?


----------



## Tisme (16 May 2017)

noco said:


> This 2017......Those skilled workers were dumped by the Labor Party 2007/2013.
> 
> Is it any wonder now we may have to bring in skilled workers from over seas?




Ignores my question on why the build going to a State that doesn't have the ability?


----------



## noco (16 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> Ignores my question on why the build going to a State that doesn't have the ability?




 And the SA Labor government probably cannot supply enough power to support it all.

Maybe things will change when the Weatherill Government get tossed out at the next state election.


----------



## Tisme (17 May 2017)

Paul Keating (2016) versus Turnbull (2017):

(and we wonder why we hanker for true leadership and inspiration)

"_*This whole question about sub-ordination to the United States in a sort of broad policy terms, this society of ours is a better society than the United States. 

It’s more even, it’s more fair, we’ve had a 50% increase in real incomes in the last 20 years. Median America has had zero, zero. 

We have universal health protection, from the cradle to the grave. 

We have a retirement income system, with superannuation. 

We have high participation rates in schools. 

We don’t shoot our children in schools and if they were to be shot we’d take the guns off the people who shot them. The Americans do not do this. 

This is a better society than the United States. 

Therefore the idea we should get around like Uriah Heep as we are some sort of subordinate outfit that has to get a signal from abroad before we think for ours is a complete denial of everything we have created here."*_


----------



## PZ99 (17 May 2017)

^ and that is why America's taxes are lower than ours - because they don't have to pay for all those benefits that we take for granted.

This... along with the exchange rate is making this Govt look rather foolish when they go on about "competing" against the USA in the area of tax reform.

It's no coincidence the world's wealthiest countries also have the the highest tax rates.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 May 2017)

Why Morrison's bank levy doesn't go far enough.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/story-st...risons-bank-levy-doesnt-go-far-enough/8525620


----------



## noco (17 May 2017)

Turnbull and his lefties should reign and join the Green/Labor socialist coalition and the sooner the better......We might start to get some senese back into true Liberalism........What a team it would make with Cory Bernardi, Pauline Hanson, Mark Latham and David Lyonhelm (forgive the spelling) and what is left of the Liberal/National Party.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 May 2017)

noco said:


> Turnbull and his lefties should reign and join the Green/Labor socialist coalition and the sooner the better......We might start to get some senese back into true Liberalism........What a team it would make with Cory Bernardi, Pauline Hanson, Mark Latham and David Lyonhelm (forgive the spelling) and what is left of the Liberal/National Party.




What do you expect to get out of them ?

I bet you were bad mouthing Latham when he was labor leader.


----------



## noco (17 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> What do you expect to get out of them ?
> 
> I bet you were bad mouthing Latham when he was labor leader.




Yes I did bad mouth Latham when he was a devoured socialist and for good reason.

Latham has seen the light of day with the Fabian indoctrinated Green/Labor left wing socialist coalition and this why the Labor Party has banned him for life.......He now realizes how dictatorial the Labor Party is and is free to speak his mind.......As you know if you step out of line in the Labor Party you will be kicked out......He does not want to be a Labor Party Muppet who is given his media lines as what to say and what not to say.....The Labor Party MPs are like parrots.

There is a another two years + before the next election and there is a revolution about to take place in the Liberal Party......Turnbull will not see out Xmas 2017....He is a gonna in light of the latest polls since the 2017/2018 budget....It is a pity he does not resign in dignity instead of bearing the pain of shame if  he voted out.


----------



## explod (17 May 2017)

Yes noco, and they are looking at dopey sheeps head Dutton.  Blaming Labour for debt and the have had four years to fix things. The debt came from unaffordable tax cuts from the Howard government; this Government is doing more of the same and people can see it because most have more between the ears than any of the Libs.


----------



## noco (17 May 2017)

explod said:


> Yes noco, and they are looking at dopey sheeps head Dutton.  Blaming Labour for debt and the have had four years to fix things. The debt came from unaffordable tax cuts from the Howard government; this Government is doing more of the same and people can see it because most have more between the ears than any of the Libs.




They have copied Labor's disastrous policy and that is why Turnbull is so wet behind the ears.


----------



## moXJO (17 May 2017)

explod said:


> Yes noco, and they are looking at dopey sheeps head Dutton.  Blaming Labour for debt and the have had four years to fix things. The debt came from unaffordable tax cuts from the Howard government; this Government is doing more of the same and people can see it because most have more between the ears than any of the Libs.



You ain't fixing what Rudd spent in 4 years. He shafted us, Gillard then made it worse and libs have been scrambling for a passable solution in the Senate. At any time those tax cuts could have been rolled back. But every government was too gutless. We are just seeing some action now to reign it in.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 May 2017)

moXJO said:


> We are just seeing some action now to reign it in.




By giving away $65 billion to companies who don't pay their fair share anyway ?

What a total waste of money.


----------



## noco (17 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> By giving away $65 billion to companies who don't pay their fair share anyway ?
> 
> What a total waste of money.




You obviously don't understand the reasoning behind it all.......Just ask Paul Keating, Chris Bowen and the Lord and master Bill Shorten who all stated it will be good for the economy, create growth and jobs..
Don't you remember them saying that?


----------



## SirRumpole (17 May 2017)

noco said:


> You obviously don't understand the reasoning behind it all.......Just ask Paul Keating, Chris Bowen and the Lord and master Bill Shorten who all stated it will be good for the economy, create growth and jobs..
> Don't you remember them saying that?




In an ideal world, lower taxes all round is good. But with the LNP's  debt and deficit disaster we can't afford such a waste of money at this time. If the gov't wants to cut taxes it should be those of low and middle income earners who will put that money back into the economy NOW not in 20 years.


----------



## noco (17 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> In an ideal world, lower taxes all round is good. But with the LNP's  debt and deficit disaster we can't afford such a waste of money at this time. If the gov't wants to cut taxes it should be those of low and middle income earners who will put that money back into the economy NOW not in 20 years.




But when the Labor Party wanted to lower the business tax rate they were up to their preciuos little necks in debt.......I guess in your eyes, it is OK for Labor to reduce the business tax rate but not so the Liberals.


----------



## Tisme (18 May 2017)

noco said:


> You obviously don't understand the reasoning behind it all.......Just ask Paul Keating, Chris Bowen and the Lord and master Bill Shorten who all stated it will be good for the economy, create growth and jobs..
> Don't you remember them saying that?





I don't and I can't find any relevant quotes from each of them.

Can you line up each's quote, in the context of the current proposal of course?


----------



## Tisme (18 May 2017)

explod said:


> Yes noco, and they are looking at dopey sheeps head Dutton.




Must have been hard to be gifted with the face of a galoot, merely because of his gene pool.


----------



## noco (18 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> I don't and I can't find any relevant quotes from each of them.
> 
> Can you line up each's quote, in the context of the current proposal of course?




Tisme, I know you are very lazy at times in doing your own research but it took me just 2 minutes to find out all the information you need on how Labor was keen to reduce business tax rate......Listen to Bill Shorten on a short video in 2011.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/2016-06-29/fact-check-labor-on-corporate-tax-cuts/7549754
http://www.skynews.com.au/news/poli.../keating-slams-labor-s-proposed-tax-rate.html


----------



## Tisme (18 May 2017)

noco said:


> Tisme, I know you are very lazy at times in doing your own research but it took me just 2 minutes to find out all the information you need on how Labor was keen to reduce business tax rate......Listen to Bill Shorten on a short video in 2011.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/2016-06-29/fact-check-labor-on-corporate-tax-cuts/7549754
> http://www.skynews.com.au/news/poli.../keating-slams-labor-s-proposed-tax-rate.html




Thanks Noco

The first thing I noticed that seems at odds with your assertion is this:

*" Labor says it will support the initial cut for small businesses with turnovers less than $2 million, but opposes the rest of the tax cuts, which it describes as a "massive tax cut to big multinationals" and "big end of town winners".
*
I'm not sure what Keating's blather about top marginal personal income rates have to do with Rumpole's disdain for the $65bn gift to big business? _*"giving away $65 billion to companies who don't pay their fair share anyway ?" *_was Rumpole's question and you said the three Labor guys were onboard, that's what I was asking proofs of.

I'm quite capable of using Google too, I just can't find any endorsement for the $65bn plan by the three guys you mentioned as having done so?


----------



## noco (18 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> Thanks Noco
> 
> The first thing I noticed that seems at odds with your assertion is this:
> 
> ...




It is obvious you have not read both links in full.


----------



## Tisme (18 May 2017)

noco said:


> It is obvious you have not read both links in full.





I did actually and it seems you haven't read it with the same objective glasses I use = I am not rusted onto love or hate of political parties.


----------



## noco (18 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> I did actually and it seems you haven't read it with the same objective glasses I use = I am not rusted onto love or hate of political parties.




I think you are using Rose Colored glasses.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 May 2017)

noco said:


> I think you are using Rose Colored glasses.




Have you never changed your mind ?

Surely with the current debt and deficit we can't afford these tax cuts at the moment.

Doesn't mean that are not a good idea at some time when they can be afforded.


----------



## noco (18 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Have you never changed your mind ?
> 
> Surely with the current debt and deficit we can't afford these tax cuts at the moment.
> 
> Doesn't mean that are not a good idea at some time when they can be afforded.




NEVER or EVER?

Have you ever been in business or are you a typical retired PS?


----------



## SirRumpole (18 May 2017)

noco said:


> NEVER or EVER?
> 
> Have you ever been in business or are you a typical retired PS?




None of your business. There are a lot of people who could do with a tax cut a lot more than businesses who avoid tax by overseas transfers and other dodges.


----------



## noco (18 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> None of your business. There are a lot of people who could do with a tax cut a lot more than businesses who avoid tax by overseas transfers and other dodges.




I think you are behind the times Rumpy.

Some of those overseas companies who have avoided tax in the past, have been caught and millions of dollars have been recovered.

Still reckon you are an ex PS without any business knowledge.

http://www.verdict.co.uk/australia-...avoidance-but-what-are-other-countries-doing/

.columns">
*Tech giants including Google and Facebook will now pay tax in Australia based on the profits they earn in the country, instead of shifting income abroad. 
The new legislation in the country will prevent large global corporations with annual incomes of more than *$1bn* from dodging their tax obligations. 
The Australian government will claw back an estimated $1.5bn in this year alone. 
“The Labor Party, when they were in government, did absolutely diddly-squat when it came to the issue of making multinationals pay their fair share of tax,” Scott Morrison, the Australian treasurer said. 

Firms who refuse to comply will face a 40 percent tax penalty rate. 
When the *Multinational Anti-Avoidance Law* was first proposed in Australia in early 2015, the government said there were 30 global corporations that paid little or no tax on the profits from their Australian operations. 
Two years later, Australian tax authorities are currently conducting *71 audits* involving 59 major global corporations, according to Morrison. 
George Turner, a director at the *Tax Justice Network*, an advocacy group specialising in international tax told Verdict that the legislation in Australia has been a long time coming, and other countries should follow in its footsteps. 
“Progress has been painfully slow across the world. The legislation in Australia just shows what can be done when governments take action, ” he said.*
*Timeline for Australia*







April 4, 2017
*Brexit: UK’s trading relationships will “deteriorate” says Vince Cable*





March 23, 2017
*Apple paid no tax in New Zealand for at least 10 years*





February 10, 2017
*This Australian supermarket is battling against self-service checkout fraud*
“The fallacy we hear all the time from the corporate lobby is ‘tax us and we will move somewhere else.’ But the reality is that the majority of Facebook customers, for example, are in Australia, the UK, France, Germany, the US and not in the Cayman Islands or any other tax havens they may shift their profits to. If you are looking at how to tax companies, you need to look at where their customers are.”

*How about corporation tax in Europe and the UK?*
Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook and Google, have their European headquarters in Ireland, which has a 12.5 percent headline rate of corporate income tax – the second-lowest in the EU.
Last month, the European Council agreed to introduce new measures targeting “hybrid mismatches” — differences in national laws that international companies can take advantage of. In other words, companies will be prevented from shifting their profits from high-tax jurisdictions to low-tax jurisdictions.
“Step by step, we are eliminating the channels used by certain companies to escape taxation. I congratulate member states for agreeing on this tangible measure to clamp down on tax abuse and install a fairer tax environment in the EU,” said Pierre Moscovici, commissioner for economic affairs, customs and taxation at the EU executive at the time.

The new EU legislation will come into force from 2020.
A number of large companies, including the owner of Cadbury and popular coffee chain Cafe Nero have avoided paying corporation tax in the UK.
Earlier this month, chancellor Philip Hammond said in his Spring Budget that there would be a “tough” financial penalty for professional enablers of tax avoidance ploys.

*Related*

*



*Three things that will change the world today 
*



*Weak pound means UK businesses set to increase prices 
*



*Brexit fears bubble despite Goldman’s denial over hedge fund move 

Verdict is using cookies
- See more at: http://www.verdict.co.uk/australia-...e-other-countries-doing/#sthash.XmGiA0GV.dpuf

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-enough-on-tax-avoidance-20160210-gmqfrc.html


----------



## SirRumpole (18 May 2017)

noco said:


> Still reckon you are an ex PS without any business knowledge.




If I am then so are the doctors and nurses who will resuscitate you (we hope) after your next heart attack.


----------



## moXJO (18 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> If I am then so are the doctors and nurses who will resuscitate you (we hope) after your next heart attack.



You been to a hospital lately?


The reason for lower business tax rates is to get business to invest in Australia. And yes, there are benefits. Big business invest billions.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 May 2017)

moXJO said:


> The reason for lower business tax rates is to get business to invest in Australia. And yes, there are benefits. Big business invest billions.




Business can invest what they like but unless you have consumers with money to spend then there is no advantage to those businesses. Business is more interested in replacing workers with machines so the employment benefits are marginal. The governments own figures say there will be a miniscule improvement in GDP in twenty years.

Save the money and invest in infrastructure, much more job creating and beneficial nationally.


----------



## moXJO (18 May 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Business can invest what they like but unless you have consumers with money to spend then there is no advantage to those businesses. Business is more interested in replacing workers with machines so the employment benefits are marginal. The governments own figures say there will be a miniscule improvement in GDP in twenty years.



They don't just sell into australia. We are the pivot point into asia.


----------



## Tisme (19 May 2017)

If the tax fraud by a deputy commissioner and son was detected under a Labor Govt, the Newscorp and it's subsidiary, the LNP would be demanding blood from the ALP, passing lumps of coal around the house and blaming the PM for being incompetent.


----------



## bellenuit (19 May 2017)

But it wouldn't have been detected under a Labor government!


----------



## moXJO (19 May 2017)

Rudd put us up siht creek. He was wasting so much that his own party gave him the boot. NDIS has only now been funded under the libs. This was one among many.
They have since blocked attempts to scale back and any budget measure savings.
 The pill will be very bitter when it comes time and we have run out of choices.


----------



## Tisme (19 May 2017)

bellenuit said:


> But it wouldn't have been detected under a Labor government!




Only if the deputy commissioner was gay, lesbian, female, muslim, etc. But in this case it looks like it's a male, worse still= fair skinned, an appalling lack of honesty from someone who didn't deserve the job in the first place due to poor oversight by the Human and Equal Rights Mandarins...lucky they caught him when they did otherwise questions would have been asked why a white man was sitting at a PS desk.


----------



## Tisme (19 May 2017)

moXJO said:


> Rudd put us up siht creek. He was wasting so much that his own party gave him the boot. NDIS has only now been funded under the libs. This was one among many.
> They have since blocked attempts to scale back and any budget measure savings.
> The pill will be very bitter when it comes time and we have run out of choices.




I think a more realistic non partisan view would be beneficial to your knowledge base.

I think you are ignoring the knock on effect of the pork barreling of Howard with things like superannuation dollar matching, baby bonuses etc gave the population a taste of self entitlement to the public purse. The public got fed up with him and not only handed govt to Labor, but his seat was lost too.... that punishing in action.

Deny it or not Rudd's victory was a poisoned chalice with the collapse of the world economies and his socialistic guilt drivers. Everyone who knew him expected the same endless slave driving of his staff that he and his QLD razor gang mate Wayne Swan had made an art form. His demise was at the hands of the public service who couldn't get used to working for the luxurious life styles and obscene superannuation only they could afford.

The thing is that Tony Abbott promised fiscal rectitude and he didn't deliver. Instead, by example, an open cheque was handed to his mate Ziggy to employ the archaic Liberal Party retirement home Telstra to mangle the biggest potential public asset ever.

Successive LNP years have not produced anything, but a four year moving line in the sand to surplus. They are patently not the natural born economic managers they thought they were.

Answer = ensconce Paul Keating on a budget, finance and treasury advisory panel IMO


----------



## SirRumpole (19 May 2017)

Tisme said:


> Answer = ensconce Paul Keating on a budget, finance and treasury advisory panel IMO




Maybe revisit Ken Henry's tax plan too.


----------



## Tisme (19 May 2017)




----------



## Logique (29 May 2017)

Nice work Turnbull government.  Develop in secret a plan to abolish the private health insurance rebate, then leak it to the media.

Remove the last remaining point of difference between you and Labor, along with any incentive to vote Coalition. It's a free kick to Labor.

Going to be a huge cross bench next time. Why should anyone vote Coalition, if they won't even stick up for such a basic plank of policy?


----------



## sptrawler (30 May 2017)

You two (tisme and Sir Rumpole) need to get a grip of yourselves, your sounding like co joined twins. lol


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2017)

sptrawler said:


> You two (tisme and Sir Rumpole) need to get a grip of yourselves, your sounding like co joined twins. lol




If that's the best you can do, it's a pretty poor effort.


----------



## Knobby22 (2 June 2017)

I sense the Government has turned the corner.
I prefer the Liberals when they are in Menzian mode as they are now and would vote for them.
Abbott has finally been sidelined and Turnbull is being allowed to show some leadership. If people want to vote for a Trump equivalent like Abbott then vote for the Conservative party. The more extremists that do this and get out of the Liberal party, the better it will be for Australia.


----------



## Tisme (3 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> You two (tisme and Sir Rumpole) need to get a grip of yourselves, your sounding like co joined twins. lol



 symbiosis of great minds?


----------



## SirRumpole (3 June 2017)

Tisme said:


> symbiosis of great minds?




Yep.


----------



## dutchie (5 June 2017)

Noel Pearson calls Malcolm Turnbull 'a white c***'

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-...at-pm-over-constitutional-recognition/8583158

But we should not talk or comment about it.
Being politically correct is more important and we certainly don't want to offend Mr. Pearson.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 June 2017)

dutchie said:


> Noel Pearson calls Malcolm Turnbull 'a white c***'
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-...at-pm-over-constitutional-recognition/8583158
> 
> ...




And you quoted the story from a politically correct bunch of left leaning commies ! (the ABC).


----------



## Tisme (5 June 2017)

dutchie said:


> Noel Pearson calls Malcolm Turnbull 'a white c***'
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-...at-pm-over-constitutional-recognition/8583158
> 
> ...





Nothing happening here, move along please


----------



## dutchie (6 June 2017)

Brighton siege: Malcolm Turnbull demands to know why gunman was on parole.

Pssst Malcolm, because the judiciary is p#ss weak.


----------



## dutchie (6 June 2017)

Psst Malcolm, just like you.


----------



## overhang (6 June 2017)

No wonder the corrupt Libs don't want a ICAC.



> Former Australian trade minister Andrew Robb walked straight out of Parliament last year and into an $880,000-a-year job with a billionaire closely aligned to the Chinese Communist Party and its key trade policy.  As part of the "confidential" consultancy deal, Mr Robb, the architect of the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement, began consulting to Ye Cheng the day before the July 2 federal election last year.  The arrangement, uncovered by a Fairfax Media-_Four Corners_ investigation, involves monthly payments of $73,000 (including GST) to Mr Robb starting on July 1, 2016. Mr Robb had announced months earlier he would not recontest his seat of Goldstein.



http://www.theage.com.au/national/i...on-as-he-left-parliament-20170602-gwje3e.html

And lets not forget what Abbott said in parliament basically asking the mining industry to look after the former resource minister Ian McFarlane.


> _“The member for Groom Ian McFarlane was the resources minister who scrapped the mining tax ... It was a magnificent achievement ... and I hope that the sector will acknowledge and demonstrate their gratitude to him in his years of retirement from this place.”_




And then months later Ian McFarlane lands a lucrative job with the Queensland Resources Council.

They have their noses in the trough working on lining their pockets post politics and not putting the interests of the country first.


----------



## moXJO (6 June 2017)

$880000 a year!!!
Man I'm in the wrong game


----------



## dutchie (6 June 2017)

overhang said:


> They have their noses in the trough working on lining their pockets post politics and not putting the interests of the country first.




Just like *all* politicians.


----------



## drsmith (11 June 2017)

Knobby22 said:


> I sense the Government has turned the corner.
> I prefer the Liberals when they are in Menzian mode as they are now and would vote for them.
> Abbott has finally been sidelined and Turnbull is being allowed to show some leadership. If people want to vote for a Trump equivalent like Abbott then vote for the Conservative party. The more extremists that do this and get out of the Liberal party, the better it will be for Australia.



The following by Peter Hartcher in the Fairfax press makes for an interesting read.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...e-but-will-anyone-notice-20170609-gwoe10.html

The biggest issue for Malcolm Turnbull remains uniting the party. On that, the management of views within his own party on the Finkel report will be the big test.


----------



## Tisme (16 June 2017)

Do you think the ALP set Julie up for a fall, by goading her into giving Sam Dastyari a dressing down about foreign donations and then this presents itself:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-14/julie-bishop-questioned-over-chinese-donors-foundation/8618288


----------



## Logique (16 June 2017)

The "Julie Bishop Glorious Foundation", very intriguing, one wonders about the principal activities of this shadowy foundation.


----------



## PZ99 (16 June 2017)

Just goes to show how petty and paranoid this debate has become. Just like that daft attempt by the Abbott Govt to take down Bill Shorten and the unions.

Some rich Chinese chick uses Julie's namesake for a company and Julie is automatically found guilty of whatever the charge is supposed to be.

Forget about using parliamentary theatrics to run the country - this is far more entertaining


----------



## SirRumpole (16 June 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Just goes to show how petty and paranoid this debate has become. Just like that daft attempt by the Abbott Govt to take down Bill Shorten and the unions.
> 
> Some rich Chinese chick uses Julie's namesake for a company and Julie is automatically found guilty of whatever the charge is supposed to be.
> 
> Forget about using parliamentary theatrics to run the country - this is far more entertaining




Yeah, it's an easy way to discredit someone by associating them with the "enemy" maybe without their knowledge.

Bishop has been fairly outspoken on China's adventures in the South China seas, so they are probably hunting around for someone more pliant.


----------



## Tisme (16 June 2017)

Logique said:


> The "Julie Bishop Glorious Foundation", very intriguing, one wonders about the principal activities of this shadowy foundation.




 Sally happens to be a major donor to the Liberal Party, so one would expect it's something to do with the Libs and/or the Adelaide Crows footy club where Kate Ellis holds a board position.


----------



## PZ99 (16 June 2017)

Have you seen Mustang Sally's Roller ?  http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/3b66768b8926ae9058da756003ff0fd1?width=650 

Some really important stuff here...

*A senior federal government minister has suggested Labor figures are responsible for leaking footage of Malcolm Turnbull mimicking Donald Trump.
*
Cabinet minister Mathias Cormann on Friday pointed the finger of blame at Labor leader Bill Shorten.
"Bill Shorten will have to clarify today whether it's true that his office was behind leaking those secret recordings and, if so why they thought that was a good idea to do so," he told Sky News on Friday.
The suggestion was quickly dismissed by the opposition leader's office which released a statement saying: "This is completely wrong, Senator Cormann should apologise for this disgraceful lie."
http://www.news.com.au/national/bre...r/news-story/a20175160e0b54b4f1c1f2956e84e3ec

WOW


----------



## SirRumpole (16 June 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Have you seen Mustang Sally's Roller ?  http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/3b66768b8926ae9058da756003ff0fd1?width=650
> 
> Some really important stuff here...
> 
> ...




It's obvious that it was Tony Abbott who leaked it.


----------



## Tisme (16 June 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Have you seen Mustang Sally's Roller ?  http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/3b66768b8926ae9058da756003ff0fd1?width=650
> 
> Some really important stuff here...
> 
> ...





The whole thing pre supposes the press should be immune to their own news worthyness. Why should they be exempt the public eye?

And of course Mathius is shouting out, guilty people always make the most noise protesting their own innocence.


----------



## PZ99 (16 June 2017)

What it demonstrates is OZ politics has been further dumbed down to anyone over the age of a Kyle & Jackie O listener


----------



## Logique (16 June 2017)

Chatham House rules, yeah sure. Malcolm must have known it would leak. Suck up to the leftist press Malcolm, that is your way.

How is the re-zoning of Point Piper to medium density going? Lucy must be across this. Sydney after all  needs more dwellings. Greater development intensity, and where better to start than Point Piper, so central to everything!

5 or even 6 storey dwellings in Point Piper, what a brilliant idea, this would be a good start to addressing Sydney's housing crisis!


----------



## Tisme (18 June 2017)

This fella seems a tad upset:

http://bernardgaynor.com.au/stupid-...ian-defence-force-ordered-to-recruit-muslims/


----------



## SirRumpole (18 June 2017)

Tisme said:


> This fella seems a tad upset:
> 
> http://bernardgaynor.com.au/stupid-...ian-defence-force-ordered-to-recruit-muslims/




Yes, and lets have more bikies and dug dealers in Customs.


----------



## Tisme (19 June 2017)

I see the Turnbull Govt has supervised the bleed to past $500bn now. That's Labor's spend in 60% of the time.

But given the LNP are economic managers, it would have been a lot more in faster time because Bill Shorten is a piss poor Prime Minister who can't imitate Trump at press parties and doesn't have his own pet lump of coal to flash around question time.


----------



## sptrawler (19 June 2017)

Tisme said:


> I see the Turnbull Govt has supervised the bleed to past $500bn now. That's Labor's spend in 60% of the time.
> 
> But given the LNP are economic managers, it would have been a lot more in faster time because Bill Shorten is a piss poor Prime Minister who can't imitate Trump at press parties and doesn't have his own pet lump of coal to flash around question time.




Yep and when Abbott/ Hockey wanted to put the brakes on, everyone went into meltdown and called for Turnbull, who is now been torn to bits for being a limp dick.
What we need is Shorten and Labor, the only ones who can bring about change, with union and media sanctions.
Check out W.A, what a hoot, halve the public service, not a whimper from the unions.
Labor have said they will increase electricity costs by 7%, pre election no increases in costs, what a laugh.
The only good thing about Labor is, they can bring on the pain you deserve, but you thought you would avoid it by voting them in. 

It will be a painfull experience, unless you're connected.IMO


----------



## Tisme (19 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Yep and when Abbott/ Hockey wanted to put the brakes on, everyone went into meltdown and called for Turnbull, who is now been torn to bits for being a limp dick.
> What we need is Shorten and Labor, the only ones who can bring about change, with union and media sanctions.
> Check out W.A, what a hoot, halve the public service, not a whimper from the unions.
> Labor have said they will increase electricity costs by 7%, pre election no increases in costs, what a laugh.
> ...





My conscience is clear, I don't vote for any of them and haven't for decades


----------



## sptrawler (19 June 2017)

Tisme said:


> My conscience is clear, I don't vote for any of them and haven't for decades




That may be true, but for anyone who reads your posts, they would take it with a pinch of salt. lol

You come across as a fully funded ex union hack, or a senior ex Labor public servant, forgive me if I'm wrong.
I'm just a guy who left school at 15 and worked my ar$e off, to be not caught in my parents poverty trap, now I'm a self funded fat cat. What a laugh

The problem with Labor is, they can't differentiate between those who have succeeded from endeavour, and those who don't want to succeed.


----------



## Tisme (19 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> That may be true, but for anyone who reads your posts, they would take it with a pinch of salt. lol
> 
> You come across as a fully funded ex union hack, or a senior ex Labor public servant, forgive me if I'm wrong.
> I'm just a guy who left school at 15 and worked my ar$e off, to be not caught in my parents poverty trap, now I'm a self funded fat cat. What a laugh
> ...





I will forgive you your oblique observations. Let me reciprocate by saying I think you have no idea of the incorporation planks of the Liberal Party or Labor Party and their founding core beliefs. That they have strayed so far from those roots and people still find they blindly follow the family voting traditions is of great concern about honest subjectivity.

If you find it aggravating that I criticise the government, you know the ones governing, then you need to ask yourself about the passivity you choose when you should be demanding the party you voted for do what they promised. 

Throwing bricks at me won't make the idiots in charge you voted in do their job.

You should be ashamed you lumbered the country with the no hopers floundering around because they don't have any talent except to put the knife into the ALP and eat their own.


----------



## sptrawler (19 June 2017)

Tisme said:


> I will forgive you your oblique observations. Let me reciprocate by saying I think you have no idea of the incorporation planks of the Liberal Party or Labor Party and their founding core beliefs. That they have strayed so far from those roots and people still find they blindly follow the family voting traditions is of great concern about honest subjectivity.
> 
> If you find it aggravating that I criticise the government, you know the ones governing, then you need to ask yourself about the passivity you choose when you should be demanding the party you voted for do what they promised.
> 
> ...




And couldn't all that, have been said of the previous Labor Government, also isn't that why there is a mass exodus Worldwide, to stronger focused parties?

Parties that don't dribble on endlessly, as yourself, it becomes tedious to the general public. Only my opinion.

As for those floundering around, we are empowering them to do that, we accept that which is tragic.
We say it is a fact of life, it isn't, life is what you make it.
To celebrate failure is a recipe for failure.


----------



## Tisme (20 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> And couldn't all that, have been said of the previous Labor Government, also isn't that why there is a mass exodus Worldwide, to stronger focused parties?
> 
> Parties that don't dribble on endlessly, as yourself, it becomes tedious to the general public. Only my opinion.
> 
> ...




You seem consumed with hate. You can't help but make personal insults, which of course means you lost the argument from the get go. Surely a person of your potential calibre can come up with better dribble than your keyboard keeps punching out?

I'm guessing you are jealous of Rumpole's command of common sense and can't bear to think someone at the other end of the political spectrum, such as myself, could possibly tolerate someone who promotes the grubby working class? You seem to have lost your Australianism somewhere along the way.


----------



## Tisme (21 June 2017)

Check out the date:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...out-turnbull-20090626-czt7.html#ixzz3rFw5IVhr


----------



## SirRumpole (21 June 2017)

Tisme said:


> Check out the date:
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...out-turnbull-20090626-czt7.html#ixzz3rFw5IVhr




Fearless and brilliant ?

I really don't see much of either from Turnbull these days.

As I said before all I see is a pompous windbag, dealing out favours to his mates and ignoring everyone else.

If a drone like Shorten can take Turnbull to within a seat of defeat then it shows that he just hasn't got what it takes.


----------



## sptrawler (21 June 2017)

Tisme said:


> You seem consumed with hate. You can't help but make personal insults, which of course means you lost the argument from the get go. Surely a person of your potential calibre can come up with better dribble than your keyboard keeps punching out?
> 
> I'm guessing you are jealous of Rumpole's command of common sense and can't bear to think someone at the other end of the political spectrum, such as myself, could possibly tolerate someone who promotes the grubby working class? You seem to have lost your Australianism somewhere along the way.




I think that's a bit uncalled for, but I've heard worse.
Like I've said before, just because you and Rumpole, pat each other on the back and like each other.
Doesn't in itself, make you right.
Just because I disagree with Rumpole's knowledge base, supposedly backing his common sense, doesn't mean I'm consumed with hate.
I guess I just don't like bullies.


----------



## Tisme (21 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> I think that's a bit uncalled for, but I've heard worse.
> Like I've said before, just because you and Rumpole, pat each other on the back and like each other.
> Doesn't in itself, make you right.
> Just because I disagree with Rumpole's knowledge base, supposedly backing his common sense, doesn't mean I'm consumed with hate.
> I guess I just don't like bullies.




I think you hold an illogical hatred or rage that emboldens you to make statements like "dribble" etc. That's your right of course, but it does make you appear desperate. Rumpole is no fool, nor are you.


----------



## sptrawler (21 June 2017)

Tisme said:


> I think you hold an illogical hatred or rage that emboldens you to make statements like "dribble" etc. That's your right of course, but it does make you appear desperate. Rumpole is no fool, nor are you.




Your funny.


----------



## Tisme (24 June 2017)

Govt doing its bit to keep expenditure down:

http://www.finance.gov.au/sites/default/files/P39_JOYCE_Barnaby.pdf


----------



## SirRumpole (24 June 2017)

Tisme said:


> Govt doing its bit to keep expenditure down:
> 
> http://www.finance.gov.au/sites/default/files/P39_JOYCE_Barnaby.pdf




Barnaby has been very restrained, he hasn't had any OS travel to study overseas agricultural practices like wine growing or caviar production.


----------



## PZ99 (27 June 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Can't wait to see Tony Abbott's bust in the Prime Ministers Avenue so I can use it as an avatar



Sculptor did a good job didn't she? Even better than the real thing! 
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/kids-ne...k=e9bbac719df9f4e81c3347abd9650d30-1498549985


----------



## SirRumpole (27 June 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Sculptor did a good job didn't she? Even better than the real thing!
> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/kids-ne...k=e9bbac719df9f4e81c3347abd9650d30-1498549985




Funny, I thought it looked like Ben Chifley.


----------



## PZ99 (28 June 2017)

LOL!


----------



## Tisme (28 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Barnaby has been very restrained, he hasn't had any OS travel to study overseas agricultural practices like wine growing or caviar production.





He's been sent offshore to remove him from the battle that is about to start in earnest. His head is too easily turned to be counted as loyal to Turnbull.

 Malcolm is about to have a number done on him if he doesn't move decisively to cut Tony off.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 June 2017)

Tisme said:


> Malcolm is about to have a number done on him if he doesn't move decisively to cut Tony off.




How much support has Abbott actually got in the party ? He's making a lot of noise but I don't see a lot of Lib people publicly supporting him. He's another Rudd, but without Rudd's brains imo.


----------



## Tisme (28 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> How much support has Abbott actually got in the party ? He's making a lot of noise but I don't see a lot of Lib people publicly supporting him. He's another Rudd, but without Rudd's brains imo.





He has enough to cause a major division and hand govt to Labor so he can then put the vacuum cleaner through the ranks to clean out the Menzies liberals (socialists these days).


----------



## PZ99 (28 June 2017)

Ok so Abbott wants to repeat history?

As in... retake the opposition leadership (like last time), retake Govt off Labor (like last time), repeat his dismality as the Lone Ranger PM (like last time) by throwing around his own horse manure as well as whinging about the stench? Like last time?

Or am I missing something? It was Abbott who burned all their political capital in less than a year because he is everything that was bad about the Liberal Party as demonstrated in the 2014 budget.

It's time for the Libs to drop the barnacles - ditch Abbott, Abetz, Dutton and let them buzz off to the Cory Tory party where they belong  < _ooh look, money!_


----------



## Tisme (29 June 2017)

Turnbull Govt is opening the gates again to foreign green prawns after they wiped out the SE Qld prawn, crab, etc industry: Post from affected party East Coast Live Bait company:



> WHITESPOT - PLEASE HELP US OUT AND SHARE THIS POST
> 
> Attended a senate hearing today and was informed that as of 6 July the importation of raw prawns from whitespot infected countries were going to be allowed back into Australia to be sold to the public. Their plan to stop these prawns being used as bait in our waterways was education. These raw prawns will be able to be sold anywhere they have no zone that they need to stay in.
> 
> ...


----------



## boofhead (29 June 2017)

Education? If the prawns are cheap enough they'll be used as bait. $ beats education


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2017)

What the Turnbull government is afraid of telling us, and doesn't want to do anything about.
_*

"From the head of the finance industry in Australia, you would say there are alarm bells. People just don't have enough discretionary income."
*_
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-29/rba-governor-philip-lowe-goes-marxist/8662228


----------



## sptrawler (29 June 2017)

I wonder if Malcolm is going to appeal the new Bachar Houli, four game AFL ban, or going to get on with running the Country?

https://thewest.com.au/sport/richmo...e-ban-after-historic-afl-appeal-ng-b88522959z

What a Joke.


----------



## sptrawler (29 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> What the Turnbull government is afraid of telling us, and doesn't want to do anything about.
> _*
> 
> "From the head of the finance industry in Australia, you would say there are alarm bells. People just don't have enough discretionary income."
> ...




Why, because they borrowed too much, to buy a house?
Begs the question, would you have done it, or would you have bought where you could afford?
It just shows how silly our generation was, by living within its means, we should have all bought on Sydney Harbour.
Then we could have screamed about the amount of debt we have, and how hard it is.
The problem is, back then, you would have been told to "suck it up princess" your a bloody idiot.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> It just shows how silly our generation was, by living within its means, we should have all bought on Sydney Harbour.




Buying a house fifty years ago was much easier then than it is now, on the east coast anyway.

Swiping away the home affordability with glib comments like "get a better job" just doesn't cut it. Home affordability is a real issue being fed by government policy; negative gearing,  capital gains tax concessions and high immigration. It's an election issue that more than anything else could cause Turnbull's downfall and serves him right if he fails to address it.


----------



## sptrawler (29 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Buying a house fifty years ago was much easier then than it is now, on the east coast anyway.
> 
> Swiping away the home affordability with glib comments like "get a better job" just doesn't cut it. Home affordability is a real issue being fed by government policy; negative gearing,  capital gains tax concessions and high immigration. It's an election issue that more than anything else could cause Turnbull's downfall and serves him right if he fails to address it.




It wasn't easier to buy a house 50 years ago, back then you couldn't get the money, unless you had 25% deposit. Then you had to go hat in hand to the bank.
My parents didn't get into their first house, until they were in their 40's.
I don't say, get a better job, I would say look to an area you can afford.
When you were young could you afford inner Sydney? I know I couldn't afford inner Perth, only the extreme outer suburbs.
Like I've said before, my first house was 'jinkered' and re stumped, then fixed up and re sold.
It's all good and well to say how hard it is for the younger generation, I really don't see them doing it too hard. Let's not get too hard, confused with, too hard to meet their expectations.
Maybe I'm out of touch.
Or maybe everyone else just wants to be benevolent, the problem with that is, someones got to pay for it.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> It wasn't easier to buy a house 50 years ago, back then you couldn't get the money, unless you had 25% deposit. Then you had to go hat in hand to the bank.
> My parents didn't get into their first house, until they were in their 40's.
> I don't say, get a better job, I would say look to an area you can afford.
> When you were young could you afford inner Sydney? I know I couldn't afford inner Perth, only the extreme outer suburbs.
> ...




My parents could afford a house on one income (just), in Sydney's Hills district, but it wasn't a palace and there weren't a load of foreign investors and rent seekers around then.

I think you probably are out of touch, living in the West where housing affordability is not an issue.  I'm currently living in regional NSW and it's cheaper out here but the job opportunities aren't that great for the younger generation which is why they head to the smoke only to find they can't afford to live there.

Anyway, if you have the head of the Reserve Bank bemoaning low wages and lack of discretionary spending ability then people should take notice, and not go on about how tough they had it 50 years ago.


----------



## sptrawler (29 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Anyway, if you have the head of the Reserve Bank bemoaning low wages and lack of discretionary spending ability then people should take notice, and not go on about how tough they had it 50 years ago.



The Reserve Bank is bemoaning low wages and descretionary spending because, everyone and his dog has jumped into property, no matter what the cost, to make a capital gain now those same people are pleading poverty.
Greed is good until you're maxed out, then there is nowhere to go. lol

The same happened in the NW of W.A, everyone was making a killing on properties in Karratha, until the demand wasn't there.
Now the same people are screaming about the loss of equity, why not feel sorry for them? They may have paid $1M for a house, that is now worth $350-$400K.
The only difference is, no one has sympathy for them, because they wouldn't want to live there.
Those in Karratha are seen as silly, those in Sydney are seen as unfortunate. lol


----------



## sptrawler (29 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> My parents could afford a house on one income (just), in Sydney's Hills district, but it wasn't a palace and there weren't a load of foreign investors and rent seekers around then.




And 50 years ago Australia had a population of 12 million, now the population is 24 million.
Saying my parents could afford a house in Sydney 50 years ago, why can't kids today afford to live there?
Is a bit like saying why can't kids afford to buy in the London, New York, Auckland, or any other capital City.
The population has grown, the area that the Cities covers has grown, and the prices have grown.
The only thing that has got cheaper has been consumables, like T.V's and cars, because we make them.
Land in inner Sydney isn't growing, just more people wanting it, same as every other City.
Even Perth, inner City is still super expensive, 60k's out has dropped a lot.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> The population has grown,




It certainly has, because of the fact that politicians want the ethnic vote so they bring in more people from abroad when we can't give sufficient full time jobs to the people we have. Madness.


----------



## luutzu (30 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> And 50 years ago Australia had a population of 12 million, now the population is 24 million.
> Saying my parents could afford a house in Sydney 50 years ago, why can't kids today afford to live there?
> Is a bit like saying why can't kids afford to buy in the London, New York, Auckland, or any other capital City.
> The population has grown, the area that the Cities covers has grown, and the prices have grown.
> ...




Na, Sydney's property market is just insane. It's unaffordable by any measure you care to use. 

Within 15km from CBD, tiny "renovated" terraces goes for $1.3 to $1.6M. A Duplex that will need another $200K to fix goes for about the same.

some 30km out West, where the poor lives    an average 550 to 650m2 block with an old 3bedder brick goes for $750 to $850k. Similar block with old fibro goes for about $1000/m2. 

Some 50K, Campbelltown, where the poorer people lives... same price. New double storey "master" build goes from $1M to $1.2; a single storey about $850K brand new on 440m2 piece of dirt. 

Stagnant wages; insecure job market; record low interest rates... household debt to income is some 1.89 to 1. This is going to end in tears. It's going to be the biggest crash we're ever going to see. 

And in a couple of days the NSW gov't is going to "give" first home buyers exemption from stamp duty. That's just another way of taking taxpayers money and hand it over to the developers.


----------



## PZ99 (30 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> What the Turnbull government is afraid of telling us, and doesn't want to do anything about.
> _*"From the head of the finance industry in Australia, you would say there are alarm bells. People just don't have enough discretionary income."
> *_
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-29/rba-governor-philip-lowe-goes-marxist/8662228



Yeah, funny that. Wage rises are effectively a thing of the past and it's costing the economy.

And yet people are still sooking about workers earning penalty rates.


----------



## luutzu (30 June 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Yeah, funny that. Wage rises are effectively a thing of the past and it's costing the economy.
> 
> And yet people are still sooking about workers earning penalty rates.




It's strange how we working slobs always tend to kick other working slobs. 

Whatever happened to that tall poppy, punching up spirit?

Seems everything costs the economy. Everything except tax cuts to corporations, corporate welfare and more tax cuts to higher income earners. 

What? You want a living wage; one that afford you both food and a home? How greedy are you mate? Gotta make sacrifices so we can give tax cuts and tax breaks and sell off public assets. Why privatise you ask? So entrepreneurs can price gouge your poor azz that's why.


----------



## luutzu (30 June 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> It certainly has, because of the fact that politicians want the ethnic vote so they bring in more people from abroad when we can't give sufficient full time jobs to the people we have. Madness.




Politicians don't care for the votes. Since when does voting matters anyway? The 60s? Maybe early 70s?

They want to bring in foreign money because that's how you use the free market to steal money from poor countries. Then you also want to lure their rich's kids over for a proper education too. That way, the costs of educating a potential workforce is borne by those rich parents, not by the gov't lending HECS/HELP out to educate their own kids. You know, Aussies who have it so good they might go learn useless stuff like arts and social studies instead of business and accounting and management consulting. 

Why would you want to raise, educate your own kids when you can just make a deal and lure almost matured foreign kids and foreign workers in. 

If we're not careful, the next generation, and thereafter, of Aussies are going to be completely sold out by our current idiot financial managers masquerading as leaders and statesman.

US economist Michael Hudson said that when he was last in Australia giving some lecture, he had a discussion with some high priests at the RBA. The guy told Hudson that Australia is awesome, it doesn't need to invest in education, jobs and people because its natural resources are so abundant. 

But what about the population? Don't they need to be educated and trained? Have job security? 

We don't need 95% of them 



Yea, we're stuffed. Don't blame it on foreigners.


----------



## PZ99 (30 June 2017)

luutzu said:


> It's strange how we working slobs always tend to kick other working slobs.
> 
> Whatever happened to that tall poppy, punching up spirit?
> 
> ...



Perfect example of the above. 2014. We had a budget emergency, everyone had to play their part.

Us low income earners had to pay more tax despite being promised it wouldn't happen, we had to pay to see the doctor, we had to work until 70, we paid more tax on our super than on our wage. LOL

Oh yeah, and we had raid the kitty litter and tax our employers to pay for a gold-plated paid parental leave scheme for all those mama's doing it tough on the North Shore.

Thank gawd the budget emergency is now over. LOL


----------



## dutchie (30 June 2017)

Malcolm Turnbull in political death spiral


THE words may have changed but the song remains the same: One year on from his disastrous cliffhanger election campaign, Malcolm Turnbull is being savaged on virtually every policy he produces.

Extraordinary data obtained by news.com.au reveals the Prime Minister, once the darling of the online world, is now so toxic that even his successes are overwhelmingly piled upon with scorn.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work...l/news-story/54cb3c3ca387906978dac42786dde939


----------



## sptrawler (30 June 2017)

dutchie said:


> Malcolm Turnbull in political death spiral
> 
> 
> THE words may have changed but the song remains the same: One year on from his disastrous cliffhanger election campaign, Malcolm Turnbull is being savaged on virtually every policy he produces.
> ...




Well it in't as though, we didn't predict it, he was useless the first time round and he's just as useless now.


----------



## sptrawler (30 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Well it in't as though, we didn't predict it, he was useless the first time round and he's just as useless now.



Turnbull is a clone of Shorten, and that isn't a compliment.


----------



## Tisme (30 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Well it in't as though, we didn't predict it, he was useless the first time round and he's just as useless now.





Agree, as usual anyone can hear it first on ASF


----------



## SirRumpole (30 June 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Well it in't as though, we didn't predict it, he was useless the first time round and he's just as useless now.




Very similar to the Rudd situation, if he's left there the Libs will lose, if he's replaced the Libs will lose worse.

Oh the irony.


----------



## sptrawler (30 June 2017)

Yep , I reckon Shorten is going to pull off the 'Steven Bradbury', of Australian politics.
He just has to say nothing, keep his head down and let Malcolm drone on endlessly.


----------



## luutzu (30 June 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Perfect example of the above. 2014. We had a budget emergency, everyone had to play their part.
> 
> Us low income earners had to pay more tax despite being promised it wouldn't happen, we had to pay to see the doctor, we had to work until 70, we paid more tax on our super than on our wage. LOL
> 
> ...




Yup. Whenever the economy goes to shiet, the first thing they do is ask the poor to make sacrifices, have "benefits" and "entitlements" cut. 

Then to be fair, they also do the cutting at the rich too. Cut taxes and cut red tapes to make their life and business easier.

Childcare costs something like $80 to $120 a day. What working-poor mothers, or those on an average income, could justify paying that much when their take home would be maybe $50 extra a day. So they either quit work or load the kids to grandma and grandpa. And those old folks don't charge for the work so it's just a handout to rich parents.

Nothing's wrong with helping out a new parent... but when the policy is so skewed to help just them when the poor are left out, that's just class warfare.

Look at Trump and the Republicans healthcare plan. Kicking 20 million people off of any health insurance over ten years, and that's just the start. Cut some $580 billion from healthcare to the poor and elderly... and at the same time, give some $600Billion to the very top 1%. 

Don't want to whinge and stuff... just it's wrong and immoral. And it might lead to either a Third World kind of economy or serious social unrest.


----------



## Tisme (3 July 2017)

I find it rather disturbing that a man who gained the top job in QLD with a 13.7% swing against Labor then lost his crown ~three years later with a 14% swing against his party would think he has the credentials to judge Malcolm.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-29/turnbull-resign-liberal-party-spill-campbell-newman/8662758


----------



## SirRumpole (3 July 2017)

Tisme said:


> I find it rather disturbing that a man who gained the top job in QLD with a 13.7% swing against Labor then lost his crown ~three years later with a 14% swing against his party would think he has the credentials to judge Malcolm.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-29/turnbull-resign-liberal-party-spill-campbell-newman/8662758




I think your signature is a very apt description of Tony Abbott.


----------



## Tisme (11 July 2017)

Malcolm trying to cement himself as the living totem of the original Liberal Party values.

Of course the original idea of "progressive liberalism", which was ironically rooted in the social equity and free enterprise conflicts of the 19th century, necessitated by WW2 break way from the OLd Dart,but  was stolen by Hawke/Keating in the 80's as Labor's new mantra so that left the Libs nowhere to go but to stupid land where elves, unicorns and magic mushrooms made policy that has resulted in us bereft of public assets, a slow down in infrastructure build and a stonking big net debt..... and a bunch of disaffected voters who vote like drones, caused by kitchen table brain washing from an early age.


----------



## Logique (11 July 2017)

The next government might be a mirror image.  

Labor in the Reps, but the Senate balance of power held by One Nation/Lib Dems/Austr Conservatives.

One Nation is now the third political party by voting intention, just ahead of the Greens.


----------



## Knobby22 (11 July 2017)

Logique said:


> The next government might be a mirror image.
> 
> Labor in the Reps, but the Senate balance of power held by One Nation/Lib Dems/Austr Conservatives.
> 
> One Nation is now the third political party by voting intention, just ahead of the Greens.



If Abbott (Newscorp and the other hacks) keeps destroying, Labor will be able to get stuff through with the Senate easily as they will have close to the balance of power.


----------



## drsmith (11 July 2017)

A Labor win would result in a Labor/Green majority in the senate as was the case with the Gillard minority government.


----------



## Tisme (11 July 2017)

Knobby22 said:


> If Abbott (Newscorp and the other hacks) keeps destroying, Labor will be able to get stuff through with the Senate easily as they will have close to the balance of power.





We can only hope some of the social manipulators lose their seats to a party that actually cares about individuals right to be  imperfect rather than being  acquiescent sheep.


----------



## explod (11 July 2017)

Logique said:


> The next government might be a mirror image.
> 
> Labor in the Reps, but the Senate balance of power held by One Nation/Lib Dems/Austr Conservatives.
> 
> One Nation is now the third political party by voting intention, just ahead of the Greens.



Actually,  latest  polling has One Nation 7%,  Greens 11%


----------



## Logique (11 July 2017)

explod said:


> Actually,  latest  polling has One Nation 7%,  Greens 11%



Cheers Explod!  Honestly, I'm very worried about how much a kWh of electricity might cost in 5 years time in NSW. In the news today, about the Hunter Valley, Liddell coal-fired power plant, scheduled to close down within 5yrs.

We're already going to have an increase of 20% per kWh in 2017-18. If Bill Shorten or _Monsieur Di Natale_ have a solution, I'm all ears!

It could be worse of course, if we lived in South Australia, home of Elon Musk's _biggest battery ever_, delivering _minutes_ of emergency power!







> http://www.theherald.com.au/story/4488541/hunter-faces-likely-shocks-from-closure/
> ...The Liddell closure raises serious issues about electricity availability for Tomago Aluminium and its 1000 workers..


----------



## Tisme (14 July 2017)

Didn't take long for the meta data wedge to be used to demand decryption of data tools so the whole body of works can be read by big brother.

Of course if offshelf encryption apps aren't secure, the criminals will just invent/commission their own. The rest of us will lose our privacy in the process.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 July 2017)

$3.5 billion per year in revenue not being collected due to family trust tax rort.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-...-funds-reduce-tax-australia-institute/8729672


----------



## Tisme (22 July 2017)

Andrew Robb must have had out nation's best interests at heart when he brokered this deal. 

While e.g an electrical tradey has to complete a lenghy apprenticeship, pass capstone testing and e.g. in QLD be retested every 5 years to retain a licence, not our Chinese trained 457s, nope they are obviously a better class of worker.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 July 2017)

Wasn't Andrew Robb the same idiot that signed a deal that said we would cut our beef import quotas immediately while the US didn't have to cut theirs for 20 years ?

Such things may cause people to question his mental state at the time.


----------



## Tisme (22 July 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Wasn't Andrew Robb the same idiot that signed a deal that said we would cut our beef import quotas immediately while the US didn't have to cut theirs for 20 years ?
> 
> Such things may cause people to question his mental state at the time.





Isn't he on the Chinese gravy train as a sham director or something?


----------



## SirRumpole (22 July 2017)

Tisme said:


> Isn't he on the Chinese gravy train as a sham director or something?




Yep, of Landbridge, the Chinese company that is now leasing Darwin port, after it got through Cabinet of which Robb was a member.


----------



## Tisme (26 July 2017)

I just found out my mum signed me up for Italian citizenship when I was 50. Good thing I didn't run for parliament.... mind you if was with the LNP I wouldn't have to resign and the taxpayer would foot the bill in a High Court challenge.


----------



## Tisme (26 July 2017)

Do you reckon could have made mum do it?

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...a7ee12df9?sv=8ecb17efb3334efa362f66f7608d9884

$1.5 million reasons to flee the country with the kids in tow


----------



## bellenuit (26 July 2017)

Tisme said:


> I just found out my mum signed me up for Italian citizenship when I was 50. Good thing I didn't run for parliament.... mind you if was with the LNP I wouldn't have to resign and the taxpayer would foot the bill in a High Court challenge.




I still find it odd that an adult could be made a citizen of another country without his/her consent. Surely it would require at least a signature by him/her.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 July 2017)

bellenuit said:


> I still find it odd that an adult could be made a citizen of another country without his/her consent. Surely it would require at least a signature by him/her.




There should be no such thing as dual citizenship imo, you are either Australian or something else. Much simpler that way.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (26 July 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> There should be no such thing as dual citizenship imo, you are either Australian or something else. Much simpler that way.




As a migrant nation I would disagree. Dual citizenship is reasonable.

Unless one is a Parliamentarian where allegiance is paramount.

Although having said that, the ADF accepts for service people with dual citizenship.

It is all very complicated. I don't like Parliamentarians so when I see their arses kicked it gives me a warm feeling. Any reason, any arse. 

gg


----------



## McLovin (27 July 2017)

bellenuit said:


> I still find it odd that an adult could be made a citizen of another country without his/her consent. Surely it would require at least a signature by him/her.




It seems as though he already had it. His mother just "registered" his birth (for want of a better word) with the Italian Consulate in Brisbane.

per Wiki...



> Italian citizenship is granted by birth through the paternal line, with no limit on the number of generations, or through the maternal line for individuals born after 1 January 1948. An Italian citizen may be born in a country whose citizenship is acquired at birth by all persons born there. That person would be born therefore with the citizenship of two (or possibly more) countries. Delays in reporting the birth of an Italian citizen abroad do not cause that person to lose Italian citizenship, and such a report might in some cases be filed by the person's descendants many years after he or she is deceased.


----------



## Tisme (27 July 2017)

McLovin said:


> It seems as though he already had it. His mother just "registered" his birth (for want of a better word) with the Italian Consulate in Brisbane.
> 
> per Wiki...




I'd be very surprised if the dual citizenship issue wasn't sorted back in the day when the gates opened to Italians after the war.

I had friends at school who were babies when they came to Oz. Many of them rec'd letters in 5th year (year12) from Italy advising them that were registered for national service in the armed forces.


----------



## McLovin (27 July 2017)

Tisme said:


> I'd be very surprised if the dual citizenship issue wasn't sorted back in the day when the gates opened to Italians after the war.
> 
> I had friends at school who were babies when they came to Oz. Many of them rec'd letters in 5th year (year12) from Italy advising them that were registered for national service in the armed forces.




I don't know. Citizenship laws are usually a bit of a mess. Italy is a real outlier though in allowing citizenship to be passed on in perpetually. I have UK citizenship, my mother was born there, but I cannot pass it to my children unless they are born in the UK or we live in the UK for 5 years with them before they turn 18. My Mum did not actually know she was British, she was born in Britain to Australian parents, until I started checking. Her sister was born in New York, so presumably she would have been American/Australian, but I don't think she ever held a US passport, or even knew she was eligible for one.

A few months ago, I was told that through a grandfather, I had citizenship, by birth, of a third country. Given it's best known for being a tax haven it might come in handy!


----------



## SirRumpole (27 July 2017)

McLovin said:


> I don't know. Citizenship laws are usually a bit of a mess. Italy is a real outlier though in allowing citizenship to be passed on in perpetually. I have UK citizenship, my mother was born there, but I cannot pass it to my children unless they are born in the UK or we live in the UK for 5 years with them before they turn 18. My Mum did not actually know she was British, she was born in Britain to Australian parents, until I started checking. Her sister was born in New York, so presumably she would have been American/Australian, but I don't think she ever held a US passport, or even knew she was eligible for one.




I would advise your mother not to run for Parliament.


----------



## McLovin (27 July 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I would advise your mother not to run for Parliament.




Long story, but in the 1990's she was told she had never been an Australian citizen. Even though she had travelled on an Australian passport her whole life.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 July 2017)

McLovin said:


> Long story, but in the 1990's she was told she had never been an Australian citizen. Even though she had travelled on an Australian passport her whole life.




Crazy. I suppose we can have some sympathy for politicians after all.


----------



## McLovin (27 July 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Crazy. I suppose we can have some sympathy for politicians after all.




Yeah, totally. Like I said nationality law is a real mess in most countries. Until 2009 I was not eligible for British citizenship, only right of abode, but my sister was British by birth. Then they changed the rules on children born before 1983 to British mother's living in the Commonwealth and I was eligible (the old law was that before 83 only men could pass citizenship to their legitimate children). It's not at all surprising that so many people don't know about certain citizenships they may have.


----------



## bellenuit (27 July 2017)

This issue has repercussions beyond how other countries grant citizenship. We also need to change the law so that people cannot be unwillingly and unknowingly made a citizen of another country and then excluded from remaining as MPs or senators here. I know it is far fetched, but what if in a time of crisis, a hostile country were to make all or a majority of our parliamentarians citizens of their country. We might then be in a situation where government becomes powerless to act legally.


----------



## McLovin (27 July 2017)

bellenuit said:


> This issue has repercussions beyond how other countries grant citizenship. We also need to change the law so that people cannot be unwillingly and unknowingly made a citizen of another country and then excluded from remaining as MPs or senators here. I know it is far fetched, but what if in a time of crisis, a hostile country were to make all or a majority of our parliamentarians citizens of their country. We might then be in a situation where government becomes powerless to act legally.




The law is never that black and white. A hostile power unilaterally declaring Australian parliamentarians citizens of that country to have them removed from the Australian parliament would not carry any weight in an Australian court. The first test a court would apply would be some sort of nexus to the foreign country. They could also just renounce that citizenship and continue to sit in the parliament. 

If it was as simple as slapping a citizenship certificate on somebody and saying "you're it", tin-pot dictators with budget problems could just look up a who's who of wealth and declare them citizens who must pay tax and then use local courts to enforce it. Will never happen.


----------



## Tisme (27 July 2017)

McLovin said:


> I don't know. Citizenship laws are usually a bit of a mess. Italy is a real outlier though in allowing citizenship to be passed on in perpetually. I have UK citizenship, my mother was born there, but I cannot pass it to my children unless they are born in the UK or we live in the UK for 5 years with them before they turn 18. My Mum did not actually know she was British, she was born in Britain to Australian parents, until I started checking. Her sister was born in New York, so presumably she would have been American/Australian, but I don't think she ever held a US passport, or even knew she was eligible for one.
> 
> A few months ago, I was told that through a grandfather, I had citizenship, by birth, of a third country. Given it's best known for being a tax haven it might come in handy!




Wasn't there a treaty drawn up int 80's or 90's that sorted the dual citizen mess in Europe?

This fella's mother isn't even Italian born, but for some reason she decided to use her bloodline to register the family,....... to scarper I reckon and I also reckon our fella was in on it.


----------



## Logique (2 August 2017)

Gay marriage, it will either be now or in two years time 2019, when PM Bill Shorten runs it through Parliament on a politicians vote.

I doubt Shorten will require a plebiscite.  Penny Wong certainly won't. Labor voted against a people's plebiscite this year.

Waleed on _The Project_ tonight - get with it 'Dad' (he may as well have said 'Daddio', like Frankie Avalon).

How does Islam view gays Waleed, vis a vis tall buildings?  But some elders are ok aren't they, like Imams, and indigenous elders. What are their views on gay marriage?


----------



## Tink (3 August 2017)

We want our say on homosexual marriage.

A plebiscite, what we voted for.

It should be up to the people, not the politicians.

Is anyone complaining about these rogues, destroying the Liberal Party?


----------



## SirRumpole (3 August 2017)

Tink said:


> We want our say on homosexual marriage.
> 
> A plebiscite, what we voted for.
> 
> ...




Agreed, a plebiscite is the best way to decide this. 

It's a social issue not a political one.


----------



## Logique (3 August 2017)

Attitudes and tolerance to the gay/lesbian community in Australia has come a million miles in the past 20 years.

If the LGBTi community is patient, it may safely rely upon the good intentions of the wider community.

But LGBTi's, don't be naive, don't allow yourselves to be exploited by groups with a hidden political agenda! On either side of the political divide, eg some Libs this week


----------



## Tisme (3 August 2017)

Tink said:


> We want our say on homosexual marriage.




We certainly do, although I do believe the social engineering has brainwashed enough people to be consigned to the idea of it happening.

It might take a few generations and a war, but marriage will be reinstated for the purpose Genesis and Matthew expounded, albeit with the Muslim conquerer's rules added on.

Meanwhile Labor and Liberal will grub for votes on the back of it.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 August 2017)

While they are at a plebiscite about marriage, why not ask if people approve of gays having parenting rights in access to adoption, IVR etc. That might get a very different response.


----------



## Tisme (3 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> While they are at a plebiscite about marriage, why not ask if people approve of gays having parenting rights in access to adoption, IVR etc. That might get a very different response.





That would raise an awareness that sheeple might find all too onerous, rather than just blind voting per their facebook and twitter masters.


----------



## Logique (4 August 2017)

In a sense of _realpolitik_,

why not a bipartisan agreement on a simultaneous, hence cost-saving referendum:
- on gay marriage, and
- on a republic, with a people-elected President, as the people asked for last time

Strip the politics out of it.  Even more cost-saving, add it as an additional voting slip at the next Federal election in 2019.


----------



## SirRumpole (4 August 2017)

Logique said:


> - on a republic, with a people-elected President, as the people asked for last time




Attractive as an elected President may sound, having another legislative layer when government is almost paralysed with what we have now is asking for trouble.

Do we really want another round of posturing, fund raising , electioneering and influence peddling when jokers of all sorts ply their feeble credentials for the top job, and most of them with be hacks or fronts for one of the major parties ? We already have too many elections.

I'd go for a President appointed by a joint sitting of Parliament as long as the position is keep purely ceremonial, but that's about it.


----------



## Tisme (4 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Attractive as an elected President may sound, having another legislative layer when government is almost paralysed with what we have now is asking for trouble.
> 
> Do we really want another round of posturing, fund raising , electioneering and influence peddling when jokers of all sorts ply their feeble credentials for the top job, and most of them with be hacks or fronts for one of the major parties ? We already have too many elections.
> 
> I'd go for a President appointed by a joint sitting of Parliament as long as the position is keep purely ceremonial, but that's about it.





Yep rename "Governor General" to titular "President" and have him report to the Queen for guidance about how to run garden parties and cut ribands


----------



## Tisme (7 August 2017)

Labor must be worried its political capital will be lost on the homosexual marriage issue, if the meeting today results in scrapping the peoples choice promise and goes to a vote in parliament.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> Labor must be worried its political capital will be lost on the homosexual marriage issue, if the meeting today results in scrapping the peoples choice promise and goes to a vote in parliament.




I doubt the Libs will backtrack on a plebiscite. Most of their religious supporters would desert them if they did and go to Bernadi.


----------



## Tisme (7 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I doubt the Libs will backtrack on a plebiscite. Most of their religious supporters would desert them if they did and go to Bernadi.




Or they might attract the "80%" of electors who are in favour of hijacking the marriage tradition for the sake of pampering the cute little, albeit hurting homosexual lifestylers.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> Or they might attract the "80%" of electors who are in favour of hijacking the marriage tradition for the sake of pampering the cute little, albeit hurting homosexual lifestylers.




If they go to a Parliamentary vote then of course Shorten will say they were dragged to it by the Labor party and that is poison to a lot of the LNP.


----------



## moXJO (7 August 2017)

Lib and labor both have forgotten their core in favor of distractions and wedges. 

Shouldn't electricity supply be front and center? 
Suppose the dumbing down of the Facebook society means gay marriage is top of the list.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 August 2017)

moXJO said:


> Shouldn't electricity supply be front and center?




Of course it should, followed by the future of the economy, housing affordability and the old staples health and education.


----------



## moXJO (7 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Of course it should, followed by the future of the economy, housing affordability and the old staples health and education.



We can blame politicians  (and they deserve it).  But it makes you wonder about society in general. If the only way to get our attention is to peddle feelgood bs over policy that is important for the nation - well.... it makes you wonder.

Maybe Australia has reached 'peak spoilt'.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 August 2017)

moXJO said:


> Maybe Australia has reached 'peak spoilt'.




Good one,  I think you are right.


----------



## Tisme (7 August 2017)

Have a listen to the boss :

http://www.2gb.com/podcast/former-prime-minister-tony-abbott-5/


----------



## SirRumpole (7 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> Have a listen to the boss :
> 
> http://www.2gb.com/podcast/former-prime-minister-tony-abbott-5/




Yeah that's right Tony, it's always Shorten's fault.

Judging by the polls the majority of Australians can see through Abbot's B.S.


----------



## Smurf1976 (7 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Of course it should, followed by the future of the economy, housing affordability and the old staples health and education.



I'm not sure that I'd rate electricity as the number 1 issue but it's up there certainly.

Do nothing and we're headed toward a far bigger crisis than just about anyone outside the industry, and even many within it, realise. I'll post some details in the energy thread to avoid taking this one too far off topic.


----------



## PZ99 (8 August 2017)

Same Sex Divorce


----------



## Tisme (8 August 2017)

The Lib boys are out on the hustings explaining that Bill Shorten is to blame for their inhouse fighting. Bill's like the Scarlet Pimpernel .... they seek here, they seek him there,


----------



## PZ99 (8 August 2017)

Bill Shorten is very good at taking down prime ministers... 2 Labor, 1½ Liberal and counting.

All in the name of pointing Percy at the podium


----------



## Logique (8 August 2017)

Plebiscite on a republic - good
Plebiscite on same sex marriage - bad

That's Electricity Bill for you, the ultimate opportunist. I think the polls have something to say about the preferred PM, and it's not Bill.


----------



## dutchie (8 August 2017)

Same sex marriage proponents - "The majority of Australians are for same sex marriage"
Same sex marriage proponents - "But we are scared sh#tless for Australians to have a secret ballot on it"


----------



## Tisme (8 August 2017)

Logique said:


> Plebiscite on a republic - good
> Plebiscite on same sex marriage - bad
> 
> That's Electricity Bill for you, the ultimate opportunist. I think the polls have something to say about the preferred PM, and it's not Bill.





Yes well Bill maintained the snowflake rainbow people would suicide in their droves from hurt feelings should an open and public debate occur, let alone a plebiscite that didn't concur with the fabricated poll numbers.

If he doesn't get the numbers in parliament after introducing the bill, will he take responsibility for the consequent suicides?


----------



## overhang (8 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Agreed, a plebiscite is the best way to decide this.
> 
> It's a social issue not a political one.




Because it shouldn't take a vote by peers to give a minority group the same right as the rest of us for something they're born with through no choice of their own.  Furthermore it will cost at least $100 million and will be non-binding, we will still have spent $100 million for Abbott, Dutton etc to still vote no.


----------



## Ves (8 August 2017)

overhang said:


> Because it shouldn't take a vote by peers to give a minority group the same right as the rest of us for something they're born with through no choice of their own.  Furthermore it will cost at least $100 million and will be non-binding, we will still have spent $100 million for Abbott, Dutton etc to still vote no.



Yeah they're just stacking the deck.






Credit to reddit user caviidae for the image.

As it stands there are 5 paths to prevent SSM and only 2 to allow SSM.


----------



## Tisme (8 August 2017)

overhang said:


> Because it shouldn't take a vote by peers to give a minority group the same right as the rest of us for something they're born with through no choice of their own.  Furthermore it will cost at least $100 million and will be non-binding, we will still have spent $100 million for Abbott, Dutton etc to still vote no.





Last time I looked marriage was not a compulsory thing for hetrosexuals to engage in.

There is no evidence whatsover that homosexuality is a genetic or congentital condition , merely supposition based on social anecdotes.

I suppose the argument could be that if homosexuals are indeed deluding or play acting, they are therefore hetrosexuals and entitled to marry, the sticking point being the communion of opposite genders.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 August 2017)

overhang said:


> Because it shouldn't take a vote by peers to give a minority group the same right as the rest of us for something they're born with through no choice of their own. Furthermore it will cost at least $100 million and will be non-binding, we will still have spent $100 million for Abbott, Dutton etc to still vote no.




I don't necessarily think that marriage is a Right, it's a recognition by society of a relationship. Society has the right to recognise relationships if it chooses or not recognise them either.

Everyone has the right to freedom of association, and no one is telling gays that they can't choose their partners, but the gay lobby will assume that if they can marry then they should have a right to raise children, which I don't believe the majority would approve of.


----------



## Ves (8 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> the gay lobby will assume that if they can marry then they should have a right to raise children, which I don't believe the majority would approve of.



They already do raise children????


----------



## SirRumpole (8 August 2017)

Ves said:


> They already do raise children????




A lot of other things happen too, that doesn't mean they are good.


----------



## Ves (8 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> A lot of other things happen too, that doesn't mean they are good.



Your previous comment is baffling.  Why would the "gay lobby" want to push for rights that SS couples already have after SSM is legalised?


----------



## SirRumpole (8 August 2017)

Ves said:


> Your previous comment is baffling.  Why would the "gay lobby" want to push for rights that SS couples already have after SSM is legalised?




I think the gay lobby would think that legislated SSM would further legitimise their access to children and that gay parenting would then be a closed subject. 

The gay parenting debate was decided in State Parliament quietly and behind closed doors on shaky evidence. This question should be put to a plebiscite as well.


----------



## Ves (8 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The gay parenting debate was decided in State Parliament quietly and behind closed doors on shaky evidence. This question should be put to a plebiscite as well.



Have you got any information on how the Federal Government can introduce legislation that will override the existing State legislation?  Whilst there may be able to 'stop' the status being recognised under some Federal acts (tax, welfare etc.),  I do not think the Federal Government has any way, in layman's terms, of saying 'you cannot do this.'

Have you read something different or is this plebiscite you are promoting based on mere fancy?


----------



## SirRumpole (8 August 2017)

Ves said:


> Have you got any information on how the Federal Government can introduce legislation that will override the existing State legislation?




Federal Law over rides State Law as far as I know.

Reference Federal euthanasia laws that overrode State laws allowing it.


----------



## McLovin (8 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Federal Law over rides State Law as far as I know.




No. Only if it's an area of law that the Commonwealth has the right to legislate for.



SirRumpole said:


> Reference Federal euthanasia laws that overrode State laws allowing it.




Territories aren't states. NSW is pretty close to passing euthanasia laws.


----------



## PZ99 (8 August 2017)

Yep, the commonwealth is a federation of states. Overriding state law requires a change to the constitution. Section 51 I think it is. Another reason why the ACT and the NT should really be states and not territories.


----------



## McLovin (8 August 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Yep, the commonwealth is a federation of states. Overriding state law requires a change to the constitution. Section 51 I think it is. Another reason why the ACT and the NT should really be states and not territories.




Another 24 senators from a combined population of 650k people? No thanks. 

It is s51 of the Constitution, and s109 gives Commonwealth legislation precedence in the areas it can legislate.

A non-binding, non-compulsory, postal plebiscite. WTF is the point. We have compulsory voting for a reason. The Westminster system is representative, not direct. There is no need to poll the electorate, unless Constitutionally mandated.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 August 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Another reason why the ACT and the NT should really be states and not territories.




Maybe all the States should be territories and we may get some consistent legislation throughout the country.


----------



## McLovin (8 August 2017)

And while we're on the Constitution how does the postal vote get around this pesky section.



> *COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 83*
> *Money to be appropriated by law*
> No money shall be drawn from the Treasury of the Commonwealth except under appropriation made by law.




That's the bit that separates us from tin-pot dictatorship where the president's kids can raid government coffers to buy a new Ferrari or a holiday home in Switzerland.


----------



## Ves (8 August 2017)

McLovin said:


> No. Only if it's an area of law that the Commonwealth has the right to legislate for.



Indeed.  And I can tell you now the issues under the umbrella 'Children'  are a very murky area with a fair bit of overlap between State and Federal responsibility.  Hence my original question.

But hey,  it's easier to just suggest a 'plebiscite' for anything that you disagree with than it is to know how the system actually works.


----------



## PZ99 (8 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Maybe all the States should be territories and we may get some consistent legislation throughout the country.



LOL, yep. I could see why Tony-Shorten-jong-un-Australian-Abbott would love to have a 4 year term of absolute rule over the entire continent


----------



## overhang (8 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> Last time I looked marriage was not a compulsory thing for hetrosexuals to engage in.
> 
> There is no evidence whatsover that homosexuality is a genetic or congentital condition , merely supposition based on social anecdotes.
> 
> I suppose the argument could be that if homosexuals are indeed deluding or play acting, they are therefore hetrosexuals and entitled to marry, the sticking point being the communion of opposite genders.




I guess you also believe that people fake eczema and just scratch their body for no reason, do you also believe that autism is all acted too and just due to environment?  Anyone with any common sense is aware that sexuality isn't a conscious process, do you really think that so many gays would have killed themselves for being gay if they could simply hit a switch and change?



SirRumpole said:


> I don't necessarily think that marriage is a Right, it's a recognition by society of a relationship. Society has the right to recognise relationships if it chooses or not recognise them either.
> 
> Everyone has the right to freedom of association, and no one is telling gays that they can't choose their partners, but the gay lobby will assume that if they can marry then they should have a right to raise children, which I don't believe the majority would approve of.




I think marriage is a right, it's not just a cultural norm but a legal contract and same sex couples should have the same right to enter that contract.  Should have society had the right to decide if women should vote?  If the indigenous can marry whites?  You are stawmanning by suggesting this is about children, this isn't some hidden agenda to secretly grant same sex couples rights to steal your children.


----------



## McLovin (8 August 2017)

Ves said:


> Indeed.  And I can tell you now the issues under the umbrella 'Children'  are a very murky area with a fair bit of overlap between State and Federal responsibility.  Hence my original question.




There's this...



> The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to:
> 
> (xxii)  divorce and matrimonial causes; and in relation thereto, parental rights, and the custody and guardianship of infants;




That would seem to be the constitutional basis for the Family Court. 

It would actually be interesting to see why it was that marriage and divorce were given to the Commonwealth, considering that section is pretty much lifted from the US Constitution which leaves marriage as a state issue.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 August 2017)

> The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to:
> 
> (xxii) divorce and matrimonial causes; and in relation thereto,* parental rights, and the custody and guardianship of infants;*




I presume you are quoting the Federal Constitution ?

That states pretty clearly that the Federal government has the right to legislate for parental rights and therefore a plebiscite question on gay parenting is well within the powers of the Federal government.

Agree ?


----------



## McLovin (8 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I presume you are quoting the Federal Constitution ?
> 
> That states pretty clearly that the Federal government has the right to legislate for parental rights and therefore a plebiscite question on gay parenting is well within the powers of the Federal government.
> 
> Agree ?




Yes, the Constitution.

No. Read the whole sentence. Those enumerated powers are subject to the first part of the sentence "and in relation thereto". I'd go further and say the section only deals with children during divorce. It doesn't permit the Commonwealth to decide who can or cannot have children.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 August 2017)

McLovin said:


> Yes, the Constitution.
> 
> No. Read the whole sentence. Those enumerated powers are subject to the first part of the sentence "and in relation thereto".




So we need to define "matrimonial causes" ?

So if gays can get married the Federal government can determine their parental  rights ?


----------



## McLovin (8 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> So we need to define "matrimonial causes" ?




Matrimonial causes are reasons for divorce, back when divorce was a naughty word. 



SirRumpole said:


> So if gays can get married the Federal government can determine their parental  rights ?




No. It can do things like determine who has custody of children when a gay couple get divorced.


----------



## drsmith (8 August 2017)

McLovin said:


> And while we're on the Constitution how does the postal vote get around this pesky section.



From the ABC's live politics page,


> Finance Minister Mathias Cormann has a plan to try and avoid, or at least thwart, a legal challenge to the postal plebiscite on same sex marriage.
> 
> He says he has the authority to release $295 million for the postal vote without approval from the Senate, who want a free vote in Parliament instead.
> 
> This can only occur in urgent circumstances. There would be a legal argument as to whether a postal plebiscite could be considered as urgent.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-08/politics-live-august-8/8783824


----------



## Ves (8 August 2017)

McLovin said:


> There's this...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks mate.  Really appreciated.


----------



## Logique (8 August 2017)

I love how fiscally prudent the same sex marriage crowd have become, with the prospect of a plebiscite at hand.

Give back your $900 plasma televisions, and withdraw your support of an unrealistic 50% renewables target, which functions only to make electricity expensive.

Here is a cost saver for you. Wait until 2019, where if the polls are correct, Electricity Bill will be PM, and will get the same sex marriage business done for you, right on the floor of parliament.


----------



## McLovin (8 August 2017)

drsmith said:


> From the ABC's live politics page,
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-08/politics-live-august-8/8783824




If this postal rubbish goes ahead it will be the end of this Liberal government. Whichever way it goes they will lose. Aside from it being a farcical slap-in-the-face to Australian democracy, the losing side will never accept the legitimacy of the outcome. And the cost, f**k me, $295m up in smoke for a novelty survey (and yes, it's a survey not a plebiscite – it's being conducted by the ABS, not the AEC). I've been wondering whether Heinz or Rosella make the best tomato sauce, maybe that can be included in the questionnaire.

Hopefully the HC smacks it down.


----------



## moXJO (8 August 2017)

McLovin said:


> If this postal rubbish goes ahead it will be the end of this Liberal government. Whichever way it goes they will lose. Aside from it being a farcical slap-in-the-face to Australian democracy, the losing side will never accept the legitimacy of the outcome. And the cost, f**k me, $295m up in smoke for a novelty survey. I've been wondering whether Heinz or Rosella make the best tomato sauce, maybe that can be included in the questionnaire.
> 
> Hopefully the HC smacks it down.



Its fricken ridiculous.
$295 mill,  it just boggles the mind.
Libs will be gone after this. I'd laugh if they try and claim "fiscal responsibility" again.


----------



## overhang (8 August 2017)

Logique said:


> I love how fiscally prudent the same sex marriage crowd have become, with the prospect of a plebiscite at hand.
> 
> Give back your $900 plasma televisions, and withdraw your support of an unrealistic 50% renewables target, which functions only to make electricity expensive.
> 
> Here is a cost saver for you. Wait until 2019, where if the polls are correct, Electricity Bill will be PM, and will get the same sex marriage business done for you, right on the floor of parliament.





And to the contrary I love how fiscally reckless the conservatives have become, all of a sudden $100 million doesn't matter to something that could be completely fruitless because the Libs won't even enforce a binding vote.  I think it's stupid to waste over $100 million only to have Libs not listen anyway.


----------



## McLovin (8 August 2017)

Logique said:


> Here is a cost saver for you. Wait until 2019, where if the polls are correct, Electricity Bill will be PM, and will get the same sex marriage business done for you, right on the floor of parliament.




Isn't that exactly what they're doing? Which is why the government can't get the plebiscite through the parliament and is trying to get its postal survey off the ground.


----------



## Logique (8 August 2017)

Overhang and McLovin,
I think the postal plebiscite proposal is both dumb policy and $wasteful.  It has been spawned by a compromise after the internal ructions within the Liberal caucus.


----------



## overhang (8 August 2017)

Logique said:


> Overhang and McLovin,
> I think the postal plebiscite proposal is both dumb policy and $wasteful.  It has been spawned by a compromise after the internal ructions within the Liberal caucus.



The right hold all the power in the Liberal party, somehow they have been able to convince Turnbull that the compromise is a plebiscite but that they still won't be forced to support the plebiscite even if the public vote in favor.   The Libs policy is essentially to spend $200 million on a vote and then say "we'll think about it".  Complete myth that they're the better economic managers as they hand out $30 million to Foxtel without any paper trail.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 August 2017)

And it's all Shorten's fault of course. 

Maybe this time it is, if Labor want to persist with their policy of shutting down debate on what they like to think is an important subject on the off chance that the debate might hurt someone's feelings.

We could have had a plebiscite and had some sort of result by now, but no, we struggle on with this farce while other important issues get pushed aside. We also could have had a plebiscite at the last election and saved $100 million.

Anyway, there is no need for a "formal" debate on gay marriage, whatever needs to be said about it has already been said, and feelings have already been hurt. If the gay marriage proponents want some action , then a plebiscite is their best chance of getting it.


----------



## Logique (8 August 2017)

I'll attempt to paste a YT video, John Anderson offers a mature analysis.
Cheers SirR, yes I was being a little partisan, as you observed


----------



## SirRumpole (8 August 2017)

Logique said:


> I'll attempt to paste a YT video, John Anderson offers a mature analysis.
> Cheers SirR, yes I was being a little partisan, as you observed





Very wise of John Anderson, I agree.


----------



## PZ99 (8 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> And it's all Shorten's fault of course.
> 
> Maybe this time it is, if Labor want to persist with their policy of shutting down debate on what they like to think is an important subject on the off chance that the debate might hurt someone's feelings.



Labor don't want the Coalition to pass SSM laws, they would rather block it and gain political mileage by doing it themselves if they get into Govt. I think someone made that point earlier and it makes sense to me.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 August 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Labor don't want the Coalition to pass SSM laws, they would rather block it and gain political mileage by doing it themselves if they get into Govt. I think someone made that point earlier and it makes sense to me.




Yes, I think that is Labor's agenda, but the LNP aren't going to pass SSM laws anyway. Their plebiscite thing is a stalling tactic too, because they know they can't get it through the Senate.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (8 August 2017)

To be fair to the Nationals and Labor, this is a mess entirely of the Liberal Party's making. 

They are a conflicted mob of muppets more inclined to hate and destroy each other much as the ALP did during the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd fiasco. 

Marriage Equality is an excuse to battle, rather than a cause to be fought ideologically.

gg


----------



## Smurf1976 (8 August 2017)

The conservative position on these things always seems ridiculous in hindsight once the progressive view wins out.

Would anyone today suggest that women shouldn't be able to vote? Or that we shouldn't count Aboriginals as part of the Australian population? Or that homosexual acts between consenting adults ought to be illegal?

At some time in the future the debate about same sex marriage will be viewed in much the same terms with the only question being why it took so long?

I see it as a distraction really given there's so many real problems related to economics, the natural environment, infrastructure and so on. Just get the marriage thing sorted and worry about other issues in my view.


----------



## Logique (8 August 2017)

You're no lawyer Smurf!
A little matter of 3,000 years of Judeo-Christian thought.  _"Just get the marriage thing sorted and worry about other issues"_.._Smurf_

Which issues would those be?   I mean besides the central bullwark of western society, and social mores for the last 3,000 years?

And yet the Australian public will still support and respect this minority group...unless they feel bullied!


----------



## Smurf1976 (9 August 2017)

A quick Google search for some statistics finds that about 80% of couples live together prior to marriage, 75% of marriages are conducted by civil celebrants and 40% of marriages end in divorce. A third of mothers are unmarried.

Society has already rejected the traditional view of marriage it would seem, to the point that the concept that it can only be between a man and a woman is really the only part of that tradition still fully intact. The rest is either rejected by most (not living together until marriage and the religious aspect) or common enough to be largely matter of fact rather than the social stigma it once was (unmarried parents). 

Same sex marriage is one of those "when not if" changes in society in my view hence why I see the debate as largely pointless. It will happen before too much longer so may as well just get on with it.


----------



## Tink (9 August 2017)

Just ask Archbishop Julian Porteous in Tasmania.
For writing a pamphlet on marriage.

The law is still one man and one woman.

Remembering Bill Leak..

From lefty to conservative.
http://zanettisview.com/story/bill-leak-from-outrageous-lefty-to-outrageous-conservative/4194

----------------------------------------

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/t...s-commission-a-national-disgrace.31515/page-4


----------



## overhang (9 August 2017)

Well said Smurf, the sanctity of marriage died a long time ago, only those with their perverse world view think otherwise.


----------



## PZ99 (9 August 2017)

I Remember Bill Leak... he looked younger and more healthy when he was a lefty


----------



## SirRumpole (9 August 2017)

overhang said:


> Well said Smurf, the sanctity of marriage died a long time ago, only those with their perverse world view think otherwise.




So why is the Rainbow Brigade so keen to have it ?

One would think it's just another opportunity to say "up you" to the other 95% of the population.


----------



## Tisme (9 August 2017)

overhang said:


> I guess you also believe that people fake eczema and just scratch their body for no reason, do you also believe that autism is all acted too and just due to environment?  Anyone with any common sense is aware that sexuality isn't a conscious process, do you really think that so many gays would have killed themselves for being gay if they could simply hit a switch and change?
> 
> 
> 
> I think marriage is a right, it's not just a cultural norm but a legal contract and same sex couples should have the same right to enter that contract.  Should have society had the right to decide if women should vote?  If the indigenous can marry whites?  You are stawmanning by suggesting this is about children, this isn't some hidden agenda to secretly grant same sex couples rights to steal your children.





Look I'm not arguing the toss on something that is unproven. There is no scientific evidence based findings to say homosexuality is a congential or genetic condition. That's it no correspondence entered into, not facsimile therefore. The whole argument is a nonsense that is trying to justify a lifestyle choice (a grossly unhygienic one at that), given the absence of physical fact.


----------



## Tisme (9 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> So why is the Rainbow Brigade so keen to have it ?
> 
> One would think it's just another opportunity to say "up you" to the other 95% of the population.




Of course it is. Its dragging the majority norm into the abstract to blur and shrink the division, which of course takes the pressure off. In the absence of anything else to champion, the youth and an uncouth activists are rolling this this one for now and will move onto something else after like finding equal rights to martians.


----------



## overhang (9 August 2017)

Because marriage is still considered the socially normal way to recognise relationships.  No one asks if you're in a civil union but people will ask if you're married.  The question is how does this actually negatively impact anyone if same sex couples can marry?


----------



## overhang (9 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> Look I'm not arguing the toss on something that is unproven. There is no scientific evidence based findings to say homosexuality is a congential or genetic condition. That's it no correspondence entered into, not facsimile therefore. The whole argument is a nonsense that is trying to justify a lifestyle choice (a grossly unhygienic one at that), given the absence of physical fact.




Again perhaps go tell all those autistic individuals to stop faking it because science can't prove the cause.


----------



## Tisme (9 August 2017)

overhang said:


> Because marriage is still considered the socially normal way to recognise relationships.  No one asks if you're in a civil union but people will ask if you're married.  The question is how does this actually negatively impact anyone if same sex couples can marry?




It debases the sanctity of the traditional marriage concept. We can all wax lyrical about it's meaning, but the fact is, in this country marriage is founded on Genesis and Matthew. And yes if you look back in your UK family tree you will see couples outback England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland who live as married couples, with children before the annual visit of the parson to ratify it, document it and sanctify it.


----------



## Tisme (9 August 2017)

overhang said:


> Again perhaps go tell all those autistic individuals to stop faking it because science can't prove the cause.




Autism has nothing to do with it. Choice is a complex thing, it can have multiple ambiguous, latent and intangible drivers, but at the end of the day people trying to make excuses for recursive abnormal physical behaviours using unfounded "facts" are just making up ****.


----------



## overhang (9 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> It debases the sanctity of the traditional marriage concept. We can all wax lyrical about it's meaning, but the fact is, in this country marriage is founded on Genesis and Matthew. And yes if you look back in your UK family tree you will see couples outback England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland who live as married couples, with children before the annual visit of the parson to ratify it, document it and sanctify it.




As the post by Smurf indicates for most marriage no longer has those theological meanings.  Slavery to was a tradition at some point that people thought they had a right to.



Tisme said:


> Autism has nothing to do with it. Choice is a complex thing, it can have multiple ambiguous, latent and intangible drivers, but at the end of the day people trying to make excuses for recursive abnormal physical behaviours using unfounded "facts" are just making up ****.




And this dribble is part of the reason so many gays kill themselves.  There is no scientific evidence that being gay is a choice as you suggest.   https://www.livescience.com/50058-being-gay-not-a-choice.html


----------



## Tisme (9 August 2017)

overhang said:


> As the post by Smurf indicates for most marriage no longer has those theological meanings.  Slavery to was a tradition at some point that people thought they had a right to.
> 
> 
> 
> And this dribble is part of the reason so many gays kill themselves.  There is no scientific evidence that being gay is a choice as you suggest.   https://www.livescience.com/50058-being-gay-not-a-choice.html





More drivel my son. If you took the time to actually research the subject you would know I am 100% correct.


----------



## overhang (10 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> More drivel my son. If you took the time to actually research the subject you would know I am 100% correct.



The whole science community looks forward to you peer reviewed paper into your groundbreaking discovery.  Not sure how the science community has had it wrong for so long.  Unless of course you don't actually have proof.


----------



## Tisme (10 August 2017)

overhang said:


> The whole science community looks forward to you peer reviewed paper into your groundbreaking discovery.  Not sure how the science community has had it wrong for so long.  Unless of course you don't actually have proof.





Nonsense you don't talk for the scientific community. There are many scientific, peer reviewed papers that all say the same thing:

1) there is NO genetic proof of homosexuality
2) there is NO congenital proof of homosexuality

I'm sure you have all the right reasons for your your crusade, but the truth is the truth and you cannot and will not find any facts to the contrary of my statement. You can suppose anything and you can try to use presumptive axioms as a basis of proof, but that premise is wrong.

Honestly, although I'm obviously rattling chains, the truth is what I'm saying. This is why the whole plebiscite debate is a conscience one, rather than an anatomical one.


----------



## overhang (10 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> Nonsense you don't talk for the scientific community. There are many scientific, peer reviewed papers that all say the same thing:
> 
> 1) there is NO genetic proof of homosexuality
> 2) there is NO congenital proof of homosexuality
> ...





As my link before indicated, contrary to your belief there is no scientific proof to suggest that people choose to be gay.  You are absolutely correct that atm there isn't a scientific proof into the cause of homosexuality, but to suggest that it's a choice is something the scientific community do not support. Anyone who thinks a conscious choice takes place has rocks in their head.


----------



## Tisme (10 August 2017)

overhang said:


> As my link before indicated, contrary to your belief there is no scientific proof to suggest that people choose to be gay.  You are absolutely correct that atm there isn't a scientific proof into the cause of homosexuality, but to suggest that it's a choice is something the scientific community do not support. Anyone who thinks a conscious choice takes place has rocks in their head.




Choice is a very subjective thing and your idea of choice may well be different to someone else, but at some time in anyone's life the opportunity presents itself to act out erotic urges. Some act on it, others discipline themselves against it, some procrastinate, some abstain their whole lives ........ all make a choice.


----------



## overhang (10 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> Choice is a very subjective thing and your idea of choice may well be different to someone else, but at some time in anyone's life the opportunity presents itself to act out erotic urges. Some act on it, others discipline themselves against it, some procrastinate, some abstain their whole lives ........ all make a choice.




Choice is actually quite basic, it's a conscious process.  Do you believe that people choose to be gay by a conscious process?


----------



## SirRumpole (10 August 2017)

overhang said:


> As my link before indicated, contrary to your belief there is no scientific proof to suggest that people choose to be gay. You are absolutely correct that atm there isn't a scientific proof into the cause of homosexuality, but to suggest that it's a choice is something the scientific community do not support. Anyone who thinks a conscious choice takes place has rocks in their head.




I think it's mainly a hormone imbalance, but social engineering that homosexuality is "normal" might tip the balance in some cases.


----------



## overhang (10 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I think it's mainly a hormone imbalance, but social engineering that homosexuality is "normal" might tip the balance in some cases.




I would agree that hormone imbalance is probable.  I've always wondered what would happen if scientist were able to find a way to correct this possible hormone imbalance or gene.  Would people take it up?  Should parents be given the right to alter this gene in the embryo?  Penny Wong would write a speech longer than the Game Of Thrones series.  Anyway getting off topic from the Turnbull government.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 August 2017)

overhang said:


> I've always wondered what would happen if scientist were able to find a way to correct this possible hormone imbalance or gene. Would people take it up? Should parents be given the right to alter this gene in the embryo?




Very good point. If parents could do that it would obviously be concerning for the gay community, and may hurt a lot of feelings if it was allowed.


----------



## Tisme (10 August 2017)

overhang said:


> Choice is actually quite basic, it's a conscious process.  Do you believe that people choose to be gay by a conscious process?





That's a fundamental hurdle you are not overcoming. Choice is both conscious and nonconscious.

the unconscious decisions are processed much faster and in vastly greater magnitude than the conscious decision making. The conscious decision making is like a serial bus, while the nonconscious is like a parallel bus.


----------



## Tisme (10 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I think it's mainly a hormone imbalance, but social engineering that homosexuality is "normal" might tip the balance in some cases.




Well how does that explain the Greek males enmasse, the island of Lesbos, etc? In the water?

There was a theory that fetal hormones combined with social, environmental and fraternal external influences combined to influence sexual persuasion. Then there is the theory of the prenatal disease, congenital adrenal hyperplasia which results in births of girls with male pinky bits, etc.

Noticeable androgen exposure in gestation or early after birth results in masculine behaviour, while lack of it femanises the brain, in puberty boys need more androgens while females need estrogens to round out the brain.


----------



## Logique (10 August 2017)

Postal plebiscite is expected to cost $122 Million.

Divide by 7 Liberal party room rebels = $17.4 Mill per head, Trent Zimmerman and colleagues.

A snip compared to $50Bill to keep Christopher Pyne elected in SA.

Trent Zimmerman wasn't selected by the local North Sydney branch, but was parachuted in by Lib Head Office. And what's the first thing he does.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (10 August 2017)

Does anyone know that if marriage equality is granted whether that allows them to adopt children?  Is that part of it?


----------



## McLovin (10 August 2017)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Does anyone know that if marriage equality is granted whether that allows them to adopt children?  Is that part of it?




They already can.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (10 August 2017)

McLovin said:


> They already can.



ok.

Seems like we have this the wrong way around then. Marriage - no harm that I can foresee.  Adoption - ??  Could cause enormous harm, imo.  What child would choose to be deprived of a mother/father?


----------



## overhang (10 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> That's a fundamental hurdle you are not overcoming. Choice is both conscious and nonconscious.
> 
> the unconscious decisions are processed much faster and in vastly greater magnitude than the conscious decision making. The conscious decision making is like a serial bus, while the nonconscious is like a parallel bus.



An unconscious decision isn't a choice.  You're really deflecting here, do you believe that being gay is a conscious choice that someone can control?


----------



## overhang (10 August 2017)

Gringotts Bank said:


> ok.
> 
> Seems like we have this the wrong way around then. Marriage - no harm that I can foresee.  Adoption - ??  Could cause enormous harm, imo.  What child would choose to be deprived of a mother/father?




Fully agree here, I'm not sure how gays being able to adopt come to be with such little resistance and yet we're up in arms about the prospect about them having a piece of paper to define their love.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 August 2017)

Gringotts Bank said:


> ok.
> 
> Seems like we have this the wrong way around then. Marriage - no harm that I can foresee.  Adoption - ??  Could cause enormous harm, imo.  What child would choose to be deprived of a mother/father?




I agree. Same sex parenting via surrogacy, ivf and adoption slipped under the radar with little discussion, depriving children of their biological parents and a balanced upbringing.

It's a State issue and all States currently allow SS adopting, IVF and surrogacy so it can't be part of a Federal plebiscite.


----------



## drsmith (10 August 2017)

A interesting question was whether or not Bill Shorten and Labor would participate in the postal vote process or encourage a boycott with the aim of delegitimising the outcome.

Bill Shorten has opted for some space on the victory podium should the vote get up. He has advised in a speech in Parliament that he will be voting YES to SSM.


----------



## Tisme (10 August 2017)

overhang said:


> An unconscious decision isn't a choice.  You're really deflecting here, do you believe that being gay is a conscious choice that someone can control?




There's a difference between choice and involuntary. I haven't evaded anything. I'm the one providing proofs, you have supplied zip so far.


----------



## overhang (10 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> There's a difference between choice and involuntary. I haven't evaded anything. I'm the one providing proofs, you have supplied zip so far.



Actually I'm the only one to provide any link, here are a couple more.



> The midsagittal plane of the anterior commissure in homosexual men was 18% larger than in heterosexual women and 34% larger than in heterosexual men.



https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/7199.full.pdf



> Dean Hamer finally feels vindicated. More than 20 years ago, in a study that triggered both scientific and cultural controversy, the molecular biologist offered the first direct evidence of a “gay gene,” by identifying a stretch on the X chromosome likely associated with homosexuality. But several subsequent studies called his finding into question. Now the largest independent replication effort so far, looking at 409 pairs of gay brothers, fingers the same region on the X.




http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014...s-may-confirm-x-chromosome-link-homosexuality

So as you can see the science certainly isn't settled on the subject but at no point has there been scientific proof that being gay is a choice.  

Do you believe that being gay is a conscious decision?  I certainly didn't consciously choose to like women so I have no idea why you would think some men choose to like men.


----------



## Tisme (10 August 2017)

Malcolm and Michaela have gone on camera and called out Bill as a criminal...... supposedly to deflect attention away from the Victorian opposition leader.

This should be get interesting. The ALP generally keep their dirty linen cupboard full of opposition dealings for just such occasions.

Now if we can just get the Greens in the mix ...


----------



## sptrawler (10 August 2017)

Same sex marriage has really got beyond the joke, why is it taking up so much media and political space, how much of the population does it affect?
We see the disgraceful abuse in indigenous communities, the power blackouts in S.A, the collapse of manufacturing in the car industry and all the media and politicians can talk about is same sex marriage.

We really are a lost cause, it is about time they faced up to their responsibilities of running the Country, rather than deciding our moral compass bearings.

If they wish to change our moral compass, give us a vote, be it for a Republic or for our what our marriage beliefs are.
If our cultural standards are to be changed, they should be by vote of the population, not by the politicians. 
Can't wait to see what the politicians will decide to vote on, when our multicultural population gets fair representation, in Parliament. 
Should be a lot more fun in question time.


----------



## sptrawler (10 August 2017)

I'm really pizzed, it is about time Democracy got back to "by the people, for the people".
Rather than "by the media and politicians, for the media and politicians".

Why do the media and politicians, believe they have the right to decide what is best for the populace? What qualifications do they have, other than an unbelievable arrogance, in their own self importance?

It pizzes me off, it really does, is there any wonder people want change.

My rant for the day.

No it isn't over, I thought it was but it isn't.

If same sex marriage isn't an issue, why is it an issue to have more than one wife and or partner?
Why can't you be married to a same sex partner and an opposite sex partner? Why, if you are bisexual, should you be discriminated against?
Why shouldn't there be equality all around?

Why should you be allowed to marry heaps of women in Islam Countries, but not in Australia?
Why then, if we have equality with Muslim Countries, can't you marry heaps of people?
Why not just let everyone marry anyone, and as many as they want?
Sounds good, just have to find a way of taxing it.


----------



## sptrawler (15 August 2017)

Now we move the political debate, from same sex marriage to politicians citizenship, what will be next?
I bet it isn't the economy, that's too hard.


----------



## Tisme (17 August 2017)

Another Minister possible foreign citizenship


----------



## Logique (17 August 2017)

I trust the Turnbull Government will be fully supportive. "_Not sure what point she is making_".. says bolta. 
I say, full burquas, for all lady pollies, it should be their choice, if they so choose  For example, Penny Wong, if wearing a full burqua, was to expound to me the virtues of SSM, I would listen to her for sure! 







> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...a/news-story/25c3706fc8a6115a37abd76d314f319c
> August 16, 2017
> Pauline Hanson in Senate in Full Burqua
> Not sure what point she is making, but Pauline Hanson has arrived in the Senate in a full burqa....


----------



## PZ99 (17 August 2017)

Logique said:


> I trust the Turnbull Government will be fully supportive.
> "_Not sure what point she is making_"...pull the other one bolta. Full burquas, for all lady pollies...their choice, if they so choose



LOL... self pity and symbolic suicide after copping the Trump Dump. Looks like that affair is over.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work...s/news-story/f82b52b576b1dcfe5f2bfba86054ed52


----------



## SirRumpole (17 August 2017)

Fiona Nash, Deputy Nationals leader could hold Scottish citizenship. There goes another one.


----------



## drsmith (17 August 2017)

Pauline Hanson's Senate attire has been an effective distraction from the dual citizenship issue but not for very long it's turned out.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-...-british-citizen-will-not-stand-aside/8817998


----------



## Tisme (18 August 2017)

Cory accusing Malcolm of collusion with a foreign govt:

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work...o/news-story/44f3288207aa43fc9d202cc58d97fbe8




> CONSERVATIVE Cory Bernardi today turned the “foreign collusion” debate on Malcolm Turnbull by accusing the Prime Minister of asking the British government to attack him.
> 
> Senator Bernardi, a former Liberal, said Mr Turnbull in Opposition had asked British Prime Minister David Cameron to ban him from speaking at a Tory-linked conference in 2012.
> 
> ...


----------



## Logique (18 August 2017)

drsmith said:


> Pauline Hanson's Senate attire has been an effective distraction from the dual citizenship issue but not for very long it's turned out.
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-...-british-citizen-will-not-stand-aside/8817998



Regarding Pauline Hanson, this was the day ordinary Australians invaded the safe insular bubble of the ruling political class, and said '_Up Yours_'.  This one stunt has ensured her re-election next time around.

George Brandis figuratively, *pooed his pants*. Those were tears of relief.  Coalition voters don't need a manager of Government business who gets a standing ovation from Labor and the Greens.

Hanson wasn't the loser yesterday, that was George Brandis, voters saw him as he really is.


----------



## Tisme (21 August 2017)

While I don't endorse Sean Kelly as a wannabe journalist, I do think the Cash/Turnbull press conference and the legislation attached to it is an abuse of power for political gain. As has often been the truth in history, legislation aimed at smearing or silencing opponents generally comes around and bites the bums of the instigators.

"Chalice of Blood" Michaelia is that nasal women with the coif DIY hairdo that can't pronounce "negotiate" let alone practice it.

*Anti Bill Law refresher:*





*Response:*

https://www.themonthly.com.au/today/sean-kelly/2017/10/2017/1502346346/shorten-s-huge-chance



> There was a curious moment during today’s prime ministerial press conference, when two worlds wobbled next to each other.
> 
> A journalist asked whether Bill Shorten would be in jail if the legislation Turnbull was there to celebrate had been in place just a few years ago, when Shorten had been a union chief. Turnbull replied [$], “Conduct of Mr Shorten, if it were repeated, under these laws, would attract criminal sanctions, yes, that’s right.”
> 
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (21 August 2017)

Not to mention that "treason" rubbish trotted out by Bishop that made her look a bigger fool than she already is.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 August 2017)

Another disastrous Newspoll for Turnbull.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work...l/news-story/e54c18082aaebd0d069a37a6f3f1cb08


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (21 August 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Another disastrous Newspoll for Turnbull.
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/finance/work...l/news-story/e54c18082aaebd0d069a37a6f3f1cb08




The Liberals will be decimated at the next election.

As will the ALP.

Independents particularly in North Queensland will hold the balance of power.

gg


----------



## Tisme (25 August 2017)

It seems our National Party member Matt Canavan has been an Italian citizen since he was 2. Of course politicians lying is OK because they are politicians


----------



## dutchie (25 August 2017)

Tisme said:


> Of course politicians lying is OK because they are politicians



It's what they do best.
It doesn't take long for the system to make them liars and hypocrites.


----------



## Logique (25 August 2017)

Read it and weep South Australians. Anyway you're welcome to come over to NSW and charge up your mobile phones.







> 22 August 2017 - Christopher Carr - Quadrant Online: http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2017/08/turnbulls-creation-australian-conservatives/
> *Turnbull and the Alternative*
> Before Malcolm Turnbull's Liberals became what they are today -- a party without principle, discipline or nous -- the platform now being codified by Cory Bernardi's [Conservative Party] upstarts would have gladdened the hearts of most Coalition voters. Those defectors will make the coming thrashing even more severe...
> ...Key Points:
> ...


----------



## Smurf1976 (25 August 2017)

Logique said:


> Read it and weep South Australians. Anyway you're welcome to come over to NSW and charge up your mobile phones.



Until 2022 when NSW's power supply ends up in much the same shape as SA unless something is done to avert the looming crisis. Smithfield power station just closed so there's another one gone and Liddell closes in 2022 (assuming it doesn't fall in a heap first as it's not in good shape).

At that point you could charge your phone reasonably cheaply in NT, Qld or Tas.

Or you could go to WA which has a reliable supply (at least in terms of generation) but an increasingly expensive one.

The problems in SA have caused a bit of a fuss but that's nothing compared to the fuss we'll see when the inevitable happens in NSW and Vic. 

Since this thread is about the Turnbull government I'll respond to any queries about this in the energy thread so as to keep things on topic. There's not a lot Turnbull could do to fix it anyway - in my view it'll take a proper crisis to get the rest of the Liberal party (and the ALP) to see any real sense on this one.


----------



## Logique (28 August 2017)

Salvation is at hand Smurf.
So take that Elon Musk in SA, we've got a giant battery too!







> Malcolm Turnbull to announce millions in funding for Snowy Hydro 2.0 pet project
> 27 August 2017- James Massola :  http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...owy-hydro-20-pet-project-20170827-gy5042.html
> ..The expansion of Snowy Hydro, which will conservatively cost at least $2 billion and which will take at least *four years* to complete, is designed to provide power for an extra 500,000 homes when finished.
> ...When completed, it will effectively function as a* giant battery for the east coast electricity market* and the new power station will have an estimated generation capacity of *2000 megawatts*...


----------



## pixel (28 August 2017)

Logique said:


> we've got a giant battery too!



yup: Canberra is full of Giant Tools </sarc>


----------



## Logique (28 August 2017)

pixel said:


> yup: Canberra is full of Giant Tools </sarc>



I'll take that as a comment


----------



## SirRumpole (28 August 2017)

Shorten is a boring windbag, Turnbull is a boring, sanctimonious windbag.

I can't listen to either of them.

I would rather have Bowen for Labor , but I really can't think of any good Liberal performers since Bishop made a goose of herself over the NZ thing.


----------



## Tisme (30 August 2017)

Kevin comments on "that" phone call between Turnbull and Bush

http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/radio/local_melbourne/audio/201708/abf-2017-08-04-kevin-rudd.mp3


----------



## Tisme (4 September 2017)

This morning Turnbull was being interviewed and on cue he managed to blame Bill Shorten for everything from Energy costs, the potential Korean war and Barnaby Joyce's dual citizenship. He continued to reinforce the suspicion that his party is gradually morphing into a 1980/90's Labor party and others are starting to question too:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...m/news-story/a57c65a4257b2be4aee25598bed6c846


----------



## Tisme (4 September 2017)

Why do pollies think they can match it with Leigh Sales and/or Emma:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-...-no-plans-to-build-or-fund-coal-power/8850332

of course it's Bill Shorten's legacy that's at fault


----------



## SirRumpole (4 September 2017)

Shorten tables papers showing he renounced his British citizenship.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-04/bill-shorten-presents-citizenship-papers-to-parliament/8870476

Back to you Barnaby.


----------



## Tisme (4 September 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Shorten tables papers showing he renounced his British citizenship.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-04/bill-shorten-presents-citizenship-papers-to-parliament/8870476
> 
> Back to you Barnaby.




The Labor Party is a tough gig to garner a guernsey and they have navigate through a mill of egotistical ar53holes to get there. Citizenship would be one of the first things people hankering preselection would throw up.


----------



## PZ99 (4 September 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Shorten tables papers showing he renounced his British citizenship.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-04/bill-shorten-presents-citizenship-papers-to-parliament/8870476
> 
> Back to you Barnaby.



You notice this only happened after a fall in his personal polling? 
Bill Shorten played a silly game and lost.

But what about this doozy? http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...p/news-story/1eed526f519de0e4c0e462d48f426029


> The Daily Telegraph today revealed Mr Turnbull fronted Mr Abbott, labelling him a “disloyal c***” and giving a blunt assessment of his first 10 months as prime minister after the pair and several ministers attended a booze-fuelled, celebrity-studded Sydney party.




And he was dead right


----------



## orr (6 September 2017)

Credit where credits due, 300 odd people beavering away at a revamped dam project assessment for pumped storage... Hats off a project that will stand and service a need for centuries.

On every other level the Turnbull shambles could only justly be described as a Spastic Siamese cat; A Spastic co-joined Siamese twin cat, joined ar$e to mouth. 
Neo Conservative  rejection convulsions.
Ideology inversion reinvention derangement
Self awareness delusion
Unable to see in the dark of its own making
Powering itself on its own crap and your taxes
Endlessly going in circles

and that's just James Patterson.... that's a little unfair to james, he suffered terrible deprivations at the IPA re-education 'facilities'. But nothing like the suffering they've got in store for you.


----------



## Tisme (6 September 2017)

orr said:


> Credit where credits due, 300 odd people beavering away at a revamped dam project assessment for pumped storage... Hats off a project that will stand and service a need for centuries.
> 
> On every other level the Turnbull shambles could only justly be described as a Spastic Siamese cat; A Spastic co-joined Siamese twin cat, joined ar$e to mouth.
> Neo Conservative  rejection convulsions.
> ...




It's all very traditional Labor policy this building national infrastructure.

I'm of the mind to think that base load generation is a furphy that justifies privatised stations balancing fuel usage with capital expenditure, so that the station becomes a bandaided untenable piece of scrap.

Poor Malcolm is finding even his corporate mates are denying his version of events.


----------



## Tisme (6 September 2017)

PZ99 said:


> You notice this only happened after a fall in his personal polling?
> Bill Shorten played a silly game and lost.
> 
> But what about this doozy? http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...p/news-story/1eed526f519de0e4c0e462d48f426029
> ...





It was that c#$@ who finally, after many years, showed his and called out Bill to show his too.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 September 2017)

Morrison only tells you the good news about the economy, he leaves it to the experts to tell us the real situation.

*Household incomes dismal, wages flat and spending props up the economy. What could possibly go wrong?*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-07/dismal-household-income-savings-sink/8878248


----------



## Tisme (7 September 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Morrison only tells you the good news about the economy, he leaves it to the experts to tell us the real situation.
> 
> *Household incomes dismal, wages flat and spending props up the economy. What could possibly go wrong?*
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-07/dismal-household-income-savings-sink/8878248





The Liberal Party has always had wages in its target. To them economics is a very simple model of land, labour and capital. The aim is minimising wages and keeping a pool of cheap unskilled labour to put downwards pressure on the means of production.


----------



## PZ99 (7 September 2017)

That's why I don't vote for them anymore.


----------



## SirRumpole (7 September 2017)

Tisme said:


> The Liberal Party has always had wages in its target. To them economics is a very simple model of land, labour and capital. The aim is minimising wages and keeping a pool of cheap unskilled labour to put downwards pressure on the means of production.




Exactly, and it's worked out really well hasn't it ?

Consumers represent 60% of the economy and they are being squeezed by low wages growth and higher prices for services they need.


----------



## Tisme (7 September 2017)

I don't know why the Libs adopted the attitude they have back in the Fraser/Howard period, but it stuck and it stuck good.


----------



## orr (7 September 2017)

Tisme said:


> don't know why the Libs adopted the attitude they have back in the Fraser/Howard period, but it stuck and it stuck good.




In Micro the reasons are manifold; In Macro Fredrich (fcuking) Hayek...and the 'Fresh Water school'.
The spastic metiphor I used above in part illudes to the war on Unions the Liebral party has pursued for decades... the asendency of the 'Dollar Sweets' Dullard,  Smirk'n Pete is illustrative( is he making an entrepreneurial buck these days, not likely, he's sucking off the revenue of the sale of the once public asset Telstra) ; Had his mother been publicly own he would have sold her... The only place there is going to be upward wage pressure that counts, Morrison's professed aim, is from where you have organised labor, an anathema to his very restricted thinking...
Their own spastic ideology is kicking them in the balls. And you to...

" let's go Serf'n now
 every one's have'n to learn how
 come on to subsuvence... with all those who own nothing and the growing numbers in the same boat..."

Thomas Piketty's 'Capital in the 21st Century' ... it'll let you know where you are...


----------



## SirRumpole (9 September 2017)

A great example of the Turnbull government supporting local industry.



> Foreign ship builders are being told they do not need to partner with local companies to bid for projects under the Australian Government's $90 billion naval shipbuilding plan.
> 
> A Senate Inquiry has heard a Defence Force employee contacted international shipbuilding companies to ensure them they would not be mandated to work with Australian Companies.
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-...ders-no-need-to-work-with-australians/8888608


----------



## MrBurns (10 September 2017)

It's dawned on me lately just how deep corruption is in politics and there's no one to turn to. Shorten ? You must be kidding Turnbull ? Grinning his way through everything except what really counts, we need Australian jobs but Telstra have their call centre in the Phillipines and on it goes.....Australian kids locked out of the housing market because of unrestricted foreign investment and Turnbull grins and does sweet f*** all.


----------



## Smurf1976 (10 September 2017)

MrBurns said:


> It's dawned on me lately just how deep corruption is in politics and there's no one to turn to.



Based purely on what I've seen directly:

Labor = some issues

Liberal = orders of magnitude worse.

I almost joined the Liberal Party once. Wouldn't vote for them under any circumstances these days. I've seen too much.....


----------



## MrBurns (10 September 2017)

Well who would you vote for Bill Shorten ? He's borderline simple ....there's no one that I can think of.


----------



## Tisme (10 September 2017)

When ex power brokers turn on their own, you know the old skool parties aren't there former selves.


----------



## MrBurns (10 September 2017)

All these self serving bludgers should be made to live in their own electorates and spend 3 months of the year working with the disadvantaged to give them an idea of what real life is like outside the dining room in Canberra.


----------



## Tisme (18 September 2017)

Net debt $355bn and ballooning


----------



## luutzu (18 September 2017)

Tisme said:


> Net debt $355bn and ballooning




That $120m on the gay marriage survey doesn't help either. 

I thought it's only around $10m for some reason. I mean, 10m registered voters? Snail mail and a barcode reader to tally cannot possibly cost $120m.


----------



## Tisme (18 September 2017)

luutzu said:


> That $120m on the gay marriage survey doesn't help either.
> 
> I thought it's only around $10m for some reason. I mean, 10m registered voters? Snail mail and a barcode reader to tally cannot possibly cost $120m.




Like the NASA tools that cost a fortune : e.g. hammer $68 + $1000(CIA) = $1068 +GST


----------



## luutzu (18 September 2017)

Tisme said:


> Like the NASA tools that cost a fortune : e.g. hammer $68 + $1000(CIA) = $1068 +GST




Are you saying that the CIA also manufacture hammers?


----------



## Tisme (27 September 2017)

*The Radical Centre*‏ @Progressive_Con 3h3 hours ago
As Aus debt approaches $520bn our political class is stunned, paralysed, powerless. Time for citizens & communities to get organised & lead.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 September 2017)

The new submarine project is in "deep trouble" according to an Independent report.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-...y-not-have-submarines-for-two-decades/8993880


----------



## Boggo (28 September 2017)

I had dinner recently with a group that included a person who is responsible for a small electronics/engineering group the submarine builds.
They found a couple of significant design issues where they had to undo quite a bit of their work and wait for a redesign that would work.
When they moved to the second sub they noticed that the plans were the original faulty design and when they queried it they were told that their job was to comply with the plans they were issued.
After days of work they were then told to remove their installation and refit to the amended plans.
This is happening in more than one area apparently and our illustrious bullfighting contractors are making a killing on these variations to the original contract.
The general feeling is that nobody in authority or oversight has any clue as to what is going on or how to oversee a major contract.


----------



## Tisme (28 September 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The new submarine project is in "deep trouble" according to an Independent report.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-...y-not-have-submarines-for-two-decades/8993880






> The Suffren itself is not in service and has a long and troubled history," Professor White said.




So we are building a Holden Belmont based on Morriis Marina ?


----------



## dutchie (28 September 2017)

Tisme said:


> So we are building a Holden Belmont based on Morriis Marina ?



Yes, but on the positive side , they are installing fly screen doors to cater for the Australian summer.


----------



## moXJO (28 September 2017)

Boggo said:


> I had dinner recently with a group that included a person who is responsible for a small electronics/engineering group the submarine builds.
> They found a couple of significant design issues where they had to undo quite a bit of their work and wait for a redesign that would work.
> When they moved to the second sub they noticed that the plans were the original faulty design and when they queried it they were told that their job was to comply with the plans they were issued.
> After days of work they were then told to remove their installation and refit to the amended plans.
> ...



This happens a lot and is why their are so many cost blowouts.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 September 2017)

Tisme said:


> So we are building a Holden Belmont based on Morriis Marina ?




20% Reliant Robin.


----------



## Tisme (8 October 2017)

Somebody is wound up:

https://www.facebook.com/OperationS...R6N-PT9Gp5h9wZG0jcd-hrPKcgtzLjmYVb4-o&fref=nf


----------



## moXJO (9 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> Somebody is wound up:
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/OperationS...R6N-PT9Gp5h9wZG0jcd-hrPKcgtzLjmYVb4-o&fref=nf



Labor stooge page.


----------



## Tisme (10 October 2017)

moXJO said:


> Labor stooge page.




 That doesn't automatically disqualify the subject matter. There is one meme there I agree with... where he asks why a gun spree in the USA  necessitates facial recognition surveillance here?

It does seem the LNP are prone to people control via punitive action, whereas the ALP prefer social engineering tools


----------



## PZ99 (10 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> View attachment 72750
> 
> 
> *The Radical Centre*‏ @Progressive_Con 3h3 hours ago
> As Aus debt approaches $520bn our political class is stunned, paralysed, powerless. Time for citizens & communities to get organised & lead.



Only $520bn now? Three years ago Joe Hockey said our debt was $667bn.

We haven't had a surplus for 10 years. So where did the Govt find $140b dollars from?

Must've been under the sofa I reckon


----------



## Tisme (10 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> That doesn't automatically disqualify the subject matter. There is one meme there I agree with... where he asks why a gun spree in the USA  necessitates facial recognition surveillance here?
> 
> It does seem the LNP are prone to people control via punitive action, whereas the ALP prefer social engineering tools





PZ99 said:


> Only $520bn now? Three years ago Joe Hockey said our debt was $667bn.
> 
> We haven't had a surplus for 10 years. So where did the Govt find $140b dollars from?
> 
> Must've been under the sofa I reckon





Wasn't that the supply ceiling? 

You know the well trodden path of incoming executives.... declare the books were incorrect, make huge provisions for contingent liabilities, accrue costs, defer revenue, issue a statement that the previous boss made a huge loss, do nothing but change the company logo, wait two years and reverse all the cost provisions and accruals and get the champagne out along with a huge performance bonus


----------



## PZ99 (10 October 2017)

The debt ceiling was raised to $500b then and $600b recently. 
Of course these figures are just that - and meaningless to the real economy.

The figure that matters is the net debt - $322b plus losses since May. 18.5% of GDP.


----------



## Smurf1976 (10 October 2017)

PZ99 said:


> We haven't had a surplus for 10 years. So where did the Govt find $140b dollars from?
> 
> Must've been under the sofa I reckon



Probably the same way the Tassie state government (Liberal) shows a budget surplus when various economists, accountants and others who have read the budget papers closely enough note that there's actually a rather large deficit.

Creative accounting at its best.

Nothing new there of course. Only the third time in the state's history that we've had a majority Liberal government. First one ran up massive debts in the 1980's. Second one in the 1990's stalled on the deficit reduction program implemented by the previous Labor-Green government and raided every account they could find. So no surprise they're doing it again.

I've never understood why the Liberals are seen as good with money. Down here their track record is dismal on their own and it was no better when we had a Liberal-Green government either. 

At the federal level it seems to involve selling assets, pointing to the cash that produced and claiming brilliance when all they did was move money from an asset to cash. Using that logic all anyone on this forum needs to do in order to increase their wealth is sell their shares, house, business, car and anything else they own and put the money in the bank.

I know in Qld they got rid of a lot of public servants some of whom immediately came back as consultants at three times the price.

In WA they've gone as far as demolishing physical infrastructure, and I'm talking about big stuff like power stations not something trivial, in order to ensure a market for a private supplier who couldn't compete on their own merit.

Maybe they're better in other states?

Personally I've long seen Labor as not great but at least reasonably honest. At least they openly say they're running a deficit rather than hiding it.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 October 2017)

Smurf1976 said:


> Maybe they're better in other states?




Not really. The Baird Liberals sold off the State owned power assets to AGL and split up the component parts so three of their mates could rip consumers off over power.


----------



## Logique (10 October 2017)

Turnbull Government - can't win. The 'Loyal Deputy' is lately becoming very Sisterhood friendly. 

It's the standard pathway. Quangos and the speaking circuit.


----------



## orr (10 October 2017)

PZ99 said:


> The figure that matters is the net debt - $322b plus losses since May. 18.5% of GDP.




Isn't it also relevent as to what the cost of the debt is; Two senerios...
*If you have borrowed money at less than the inflation rate you are seriously in front...
*If you have borrowed money and the investment you make with the money is going backward compared to the cost of the money, you better get your house in order.

It's worth keeping in mind that we as Australians are 24 odd million population and we collectively own a continent plus it offshore resources... That is a fair collatoral asset. Care to value it?
P.S Barrier Reef should maybe be a 50% right down...


----------



## PZ99 (10 October 2017)

Good idea. We could even increase our collateral by fining the criminal organisation known as CBA by the equivalent of their entire market cap and reverse privatise it for equilateral value. LOL


----------



## dutchie (11 October 2017)

It's official , we are no longer the lucky country, we are in fact the dumb country.

The federal government will pay households and businesses across three states to turn down their air conditioning, furnaces and cool rooms to stave off blackouts during peak demand.

Under a $36 million program to be launched today by Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg, thousands of households in NSW, Victoria and South Australia will also be invited to voluntarily cut their energy use in return for incentives such as rebates on power bills.

The Turnbull government, faced with skyrocketing power prices and grid instability across the national electricity market, will over three years spend $28.6m on 10 pilot projects. The Berejiklian government will pay $7.2m towards set up and operational costs of trials in NSW.

Trial projects include a smart thermostat to control air conditioning, heating and ventilation in businesses and homes, and householders reducing energy use for one to four hours in exchange for a weekend of free electricity.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...s/news-story/5d3ab0680dfaabe306de3bcde8bdda93


----------



## Tisme (11 October 2017)

dutchie said:


> It's official , we are no longer the lucky country, we are in fact the dumb country.
> 
> The federal government will pay households and businesses across three states to turn down their air conditioning, furnaces and cool rooms to stave off blackouts during peak demand.
> 
> ...





Interesting how the LNP went to town on the Labor Govt in QLD yesterday for proposing the turning up of aircond, off of pool pumps, etc in summer, based on a report that suggested voluntary energy management... when in fact the govt didn't propose any such thing.

I'm wondering in their zeal they didn't look at the logo at the top carefully enough and confused Josh's dept with the State dept.


----------



## Logique (11 October 2017)

dutchie said:


> It's official , we are no longer the lucky country, we are in fact the dumb country.
> 
> The federal government will pay households and businesses across three states to turn down their air conditioning, furnaces and cool rooms to stave off blackouts during peak demand.
> 
> ...



It's beyond exasperating.  Richard Di Natale the other night on ABC Q & A, pretending it's the big export gas companies to blame for high electricity prices...it's enough to turn your stomach... The breathtaking hypocrisy of the Greens!

The Greens are primarily to blame for high electricity prices. But 'Electricity Bill' helped them.


----------



## Smurf1976 (12 October 2017)

Logique said:


> The Greens are primarily to blame for high electricity prices. But 'Electricity Bill' helped them.




As someone who saw this coming literally 20 years ago and has said plenty about it, I'll observe that all sides politics have contributed.

The single biggest factor by far however is a concept known as "neoliberal economics".

No other country on earth has adopted the Australian "leave it to the market" approach and there's a damn good reason for that. Yep, even the USA regulates.

There is only one country in the world which does not regulate gas exports. That country is Australia.

There is only one developed country which does not meet IEA recommendations for petroleum stockpiles in case of supply disruption. Yep, that country is Australia.

Australia is also one of very few that doesn't even have a policy covering the mix of energy sources used.

The Greens haven't helped but they're by no means the sole or even biggest cause. That the ALP and Coalition both simply lost interest in doing anything that didn't fit within the umbrella of economics is the crux of it. Engineering and strategic thinking is anathema to most politicians unfortunately.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 October 2017)

Do our companies pay high taxes ? 

Not really.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-16/verrender-corporate-tax-cuts-who-wins/9052600


----------



## Tisme (16 October 2017)

Smurf1976 said:


> As someone who saw this coming literally 20 years ago and has said plenty about it, I'll observe that all sides politics have contributed.
> 
> .




Only rusted on party tragics would have denied the inevitability of price rises when you hand a private company an open cheque and a seat at the Oligopoly table.


----------



## dutchie (16 October 2017)

Turnbull has got to go. One of the weakest PM's the Coalition has ever had.

The sooner, the better, if the polls are any indication.


----------



## PZ99 (17 October 2017)

If the polls are the indication the weakest would have to be Tony Abbott.

I think he responsible for the current polling - not to mention his own dismal figures.


----------



## Logique (17 October 2017)

PZ99 said:


> If the polls are the indication the weakest would have to be Tony Abbott.
> I think he responsible for the current polling - not to mention his own dismal figures.



Didn't have much trouble disposing of Rudd-Gillard.


----------



## PZ99 (17 October 2017)

Logique said:


> Didn't have much trouble disposing of Rudd-Gillard.



And that's what makes it even more hilarious.

Tony Abbott spent all his energy campaigning against a divided Govt with weak leadership only to then demonstrate the very same behaviour himself... on a bigger scale.


----------



## sptrawler (17 October 2017)

PZ99 said:


> And that's what makes it even more hilarious.
> 
> Tony Abbott spent all his energy campaigning against a divided Govt with weak leadership only to then demonstrate the very same behaviour himself... on a bigger scale.




Actually if you remember, Abbott and Hockey were chucked out because they were drawing a hard line, to reign in spending.
Which is what the Libs are trying to do now, they were dumb to replace Abbott with Turnbull, people want strong leadership they certainly aren't getting it with Turnbull. 
Luckily for the Libs, Labor are sticking with  Shorten.


----------



## boofhead (17 October 2017)

Abbott and Hocket cut some spending only to increase some in other areas. Abbott's recent remarks about regrets as PM seem to stem from his need to say things to please various people he talks to. No leadership there.


----------



## PZ99 (17 October 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Actually if you remember, Abbott and Hockey were chucked out because they were drawing a hard line, to reign in spending.
> Which is what the Libs are trying to do now, they were dumb to replace Abbott with Turnbull, people want strong leadership they certainly aren't getting it with Turnbull.
> Luckily for the Libs, Labor are sticking with  Shorten.



Tony Abbott survived a leadership spill after that 2014 budget and his second budget contained far more spending. So I disagree he was dumped because of cutting spending. It was his leadership style that brought about his undoing and even nearly cost him his seat. His antics ever since have confirmed he isn't the right man for the job.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 October 2017)

PZ99 said:
			
		

> His [Abbott's] antics ever since have confirmed he isn't the right man for the job.




The scary thing is that Dutton appears to be lining up as a defacto Abbott.


----------



## sptrawler (17 October 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Tony Abbott survived a leadership spill after that 2014 budget and his second budget contained far more spending. So I disagree he was dumped because of cutting spending. It was his leadership style that brought about his undoing and even nearly cost him his seat. His antics ever since have confirmed he isn't the right man for the job.




Well he certainly is getting plenty of coverage by the left wing Fairfax media, so they must be concerned.


----------



## PZ99 (17 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The scary thing is that Dutton appears to be lining up as a defacto Abbott.



Seems that way although I don't think Julie bishop would stick around if she gets overlooked again. But this divided Govt is finished whoever leads it. It needs to go into opposition, rebuild, refresh and get real.


----------



## PZ99 (17 October 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Well he certainly is getting plenty of coverage by the left wing Fairfax media, so they must be concerned.



He is also getting plenty of coverage in the right wing tax avoider Murdoch media.
Even the Govt have had enough of his continual sabotage. He should be dumped ASAP.


----------



## Knobby22 (17 October 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Well he certainly is getting plenty of coverage by the left wing Fairfax media, so they must be concerned.




No they love it. Abbott is making sure the Libs don't win the next election.
He is beneath contempt.


----------



## Tisme (17 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The scary thing is that Dutton appears to be lining up as a defacto Abbott.





Word is that Tony is riding Dutton's horse FTW


----------



## sptrawler (17 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> Word is that Tony is riding Dutton's horse FTW



Dutton is about as likeable as Shorten, at least with them two leading their respective parties, the smaller parties will do really well.


----------



## Tisme (17 October 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Dutton is about as likeable as Shorten, at least with them two leading their respective parties, the smaller parties will do really well.




I was watching Shorten the other day and he certainly comes across a dispassionate man trying to emulate passion. Dutton could have been the doppleganger for Ben Stiller's "Simple Jack".


----------



## luutzu (17 October 2017)




----------



## PZ99 (17 October 2017)

Essential Research today...


----------



## Logique (18 October 2017)

The Turnbull government's _National Energy Guarantee_ is a triumph of common sense, over ideological extremism, including the renewables rent-seekers.

And a break for ordinary Australians, on runaway electricity and gas prices.

When Greens leader Richard Di Natale is hissing poison at you in the Senate, you know you've got the policy settings right. He wants you to pay more for electricity and gas, just to stroke his ideological vanities.

What does he care as a qualified GP, about rising energy prices? He can afford to pay the increase!  Typical elitist.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 October 2017)

Logique said:


> The Turnbull government's _National Energy Guarantee_ is a triumph of common sense, over ideological extremism, including the renewables rent-seekers.




Yes I'm sure the coal rent seekers will be happy .


----------



## sptrawler (18 October 2017)

Logique said:


> The Turnbull government's _National Energy Guarantee_ is a triumph of common sense, over ideological extremism, including the renewables rent-seekers.
> 
> And a break for ordinary Australians, on runaway electricity and gas prices.
> 
> ...




At least it puts the onus on the power companies, to supply system reliability. The way it was going the public would have been paying power companies, to install renewables and close down spinning reserve.


----------



## Logique (18 October 2017)

NSW, the sensible State,
will hold out against expensive Green electricity.

And also against the ridiculous bans on supermarket plastic bags - fostered by people _who don't do the shopping._ In NSW, the Commonwealth has at least one sane State.

Unlike the SA and TAS mendicants. Whose state governments, let's face it, are certifiable. Off their trolleys. Almost as deluded as Victoria, and that's saying something!


----------



## Wysiwyg (18 October 2017)

Addressing electricity reliability is good, calling this energy guarantee policy a "game changer" is ridiculous. Basking in the spotlight like he made an Earth moving proclamation from a government looking 50 years ahead.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 October 2017)

Logique said:


> NSW, the sensible State,
> will hold out against expensive Green electricity.




Last I heard the fossil fuel companies were being paid $4 billion a year in subsidies.

Should they stay or should they go ?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-...-receive-4-billion-dollar-in-subsidie/5881814


----------



## PZ99 (18 October 2017)

Logique said:


> NSW, the sensible State,
> will hold out against expensive Green electricity.
> 
> And also against the ridiculous bans on supermarket plastic bags - fostered by people _who don't do the shopping._ In NSW, the Commonwealth has at least one sane State.
> ...



It won't make much difference which states ban them or not.
They are getting banned unilaterally by Coles and Woolies anyway.
As an intelligent species we can adapt... so it's no big deal really.

As for the coal... don't burn it. Sell it. And use the revenue for pumped hydro.


----------



## Logique (20 October 2017)

New Zealand is to get a minority government of Labour, the Greens and populist Winston Peters.  All led by a 37 tyro PM who favours a water tax on NZ farmers.

Yeah, this is going to end well.


----------



## Logique (20 October 2017)

Logique said:


> The Turnbull government's _National Energy Guarantee_ is a triumph of common sense, over ideological extremism, including the renewables rent-seekers.
> And a break for ordinary Australians, on runaway electricity and gas prices.
> When Greens leader Richard Di Natale is hissing poison at you in the Senate, you know you've got the policy settings right. He wants you to pay more for electricity and gas, just to stroke his ideological vanities.
> What does he care as a qualified GP, about rising energy prices? He can afford to pay the increase!  Typical elitist.



Apologies, I was conned by the Coalition, and retract. 

This looks more like an ETS by stealth. Make the energy retailers buy more renewables each successive year. How could this possibly restrict runaway energy prices!


----------



## sptrawler (20 October 2017)

Logique said:


> Apologies, I was conned by the Coalition, and retract.
> 
> This looks more like an ETS by stealth. Make the energy retailers buy more renewables each successive year. How could this possibly restrict runaway energy prices!




One assumes it will reduce runaway prices, by slowing the headlong rush to knock over operating thermal plant and replace it by taxpayer funded renewables.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 October 2017)

Brandis and Dutton clash over Home Affairs Ministry.

Looks like it's a bit of a monster, and with a tyranic mandarin as the Department Head.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-...deepens-home-affairs-michelle-grattan/9069500


----------



## sptrawler (20 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Brandis and Dutton clash over Home Affairs Ministry.
> 
> Looks like it's a bit of a monster, and with a tyranic mandarin as the Department Head.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-...deepens-home-affairs-michelle-grattan/9069500




Possibly both have aspirations, for the "big chair", in the event Malcolm should fall off it.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 October 2017)

Desperation time from Turnbull I think.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-24/police-raids-at-awu-headquarters-in-sydney-melbourne/9081416


----------



## Tisme (24 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Desperation time from Turnbull I think.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-24/police-raids-at-awu-headquarters-in-sydney-melbourne/9081416





Public don't fall for that one anymore. Overused and abused by the LNP


----------



## sptrawler (25 October 2017)

Funny how all and sundry even Fairfax reporters, were hailing Malcolm as the messiah, now alas it is over.
Only the LNP followers, said he would be a disaster, it's a bit like a Rudd re run.
The only saving grace is, whoever gets the top job, will be pulled down by the media, it has become a National pass time.IMO


----------



## PZ99 (26 October 2017)

The Abbott followers said he would be a disaster and they are going out of their way to make it a self fulfilled prophecy. I can't wait for their upcoming election loss and the obligatory doco about the Abbott years that comes after it.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 October 2017)

PZ99 said:


> The Abbott followers said he would be a disaster and they are going out of their way to make it a self fulfilled prophecy. I can't wait for their upcoming election loss and the obligatory doco about the Abbott years that comes after it.




They may bring him back as Turnbull continues to slide. The killing fields Pt II.


----------



## PZ99 (26 October 2017)

If they bring him back it'll cost them three terms in opposition. 

Abbott's finished once and for all. Stick a fork in him. He's done.


----------



## overhang (26 October 2017)

We need an ICAC.  The Liberal government continue to use the AFP as a political pawn.  The same AFP that only this week was revealed were understaffed and couldn't investigate a 1.6 tonne cocaine importation but had the resources to raid the AWU officers for documents 10 years old.

Will the AFP now raid Michaelia Cash's office over the leaks to the media and how her office was aware the AFP raid would take place?  The same way they raided Conroy's office over the NBN Co leaks.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 October 2017)

overhang said:


> We need an ICAC.  The Liberal government continue to use the AFP as a political pawn.  The same AFP that only this week was revealed were understaffed and couldn't investigate a 1.6 tonne cocaine importation but had the resources to raid the AWU officers for documents 10 years old.
> 
> Will the AFP now raid Michaelia Cash's office over the leaks to the media and how her office was aware the AFP raid would take place?  The same way they raided Conroy's office over the NBN Co leaks.




Yes indeed.

We now have a government for whom persecuting their political opponents is more important than catching drug dealers.

It's a pretty dangerous government to have in power imo. They have tried cutting the ABC's budget, they spent $80 million into a Royal Commission on Bill Shorten and now they are using a phoney ROC to go after him.

IMO $100,000 given to GetUp is nowhere near as dangerous to the country as having our energy policy decided by coal companies giving donations to the LNP.


----------



## Tisme (26 October 2017)

I have to wonder why the AFP would be raiding a union office, when the material is presumably sitting over at the partisan Royal Commission into Bill Shorten?


----------



## Tisme (26 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> IMO $100,000 given to GetUp is nowhere near as dangerous to the country as having our energy policy decided by coal companies giving donations to the LNP.




The Labor Party is very good at filing away dirt on their opponents. I wouldn't be surprised if a tit for tat revelation isn't imminent.


----------



## PZ99 (26 October 2017)

It's quickly turning into another ute-gate for sure...

Now we know why the Turnbull Government announced a gun amnesty last year... there's far too many bullet holes and discarded shoes on the floors in the corridors of power


----------



## moXJO (26 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> The Labor Party is very good at filing away dirt on their opponents. I wouldn't be surprised if a tit for tat revelation isn't imminent.



Why are the libs dumb enough to think that those documents were not already shredded years ago. Unions cover their butts in case of such an event. 

The only reason why would be political point scoring. Or they have had a tipoff over unrelated dirt, that they couldn't raid on suspicion.


----------



## Tisme (26 October 2017)

moXJO said:


> Why are the libs dumb enough to think that those documents were not already shredded years ago. Unions cover their butts in case of such an event.
> 
> The only reason why would be political point scoring. Or they have had a tipoff over unrelated dirt, that they couldn't raid on suspicion.





I'm so glad neither camp has any hold over me. I can't imagine the anxiety going on in the heads of the rusted ons.


----------



## moXJO (26 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> I'm so glad neither camp has any hold over me. I can't imagine the anxiety going on in the heads of the rusted ons.



There can't be many "rusted ons" left in the current political environment.


----------



## sptrawler (26 October 2017)

moXJO said:


> There can't be many "rusted ons" left in the current political environment.




I think you are spot on there, both sides of politics, are struggling with their credibility.
Imo both are that busy trying to be popular, they become a contradiction by losing their identity and with that their followers .


----------



## overhang (26 October 2017)

Andrew Bolt today



> *TUESDAY’S police raids on Bill Shorten’s former union seem part of a disturbing pattern of the Liberals using state power to persecute a political enemy.
> 
> 
> The optics were ghastly. Someone actually tipped off the media to camp outside the Australian Workers’ Union offices in Sydney and Melbourne at least 20 minutes before police swooped in to raid them.
> ...


----------



## Knobby22 (26 October 2017)

Talk about an own goal.
Even being criticised by Bolt (above). What was the Cabinet thinking?
They are increasingly looking like getting tossed out next election.


----------



## IFocus (26 October 2017)

All straight out of the US Republican hand book that Abbott / LNP has been copying for some time.

1. Just say no to everything and lie about the outcome
2. Run government agencies against your opponents at every opportunity ask Hanson how that went.
3. When it all blows up claim you are the victim. 

Sad day for Australian politics.


----------



## Smurf1976 (26 October 2017)

Sounds like the standard tactics of anyone who's out of their depth to me.

Divert attention away from what you're supposed to be doing but are no good at.

Target anyone who could potentially fill your shoes.

Target even more aggressively anyone who you suspect is more capable than you are. Leave no stone unturned in trying to find some way to remove them from the equation.

If you can't find anything then just make things up. Rewrite history if you have to. If nothing else that will divert their efforts into defending themselves thus leaving no time to do much else and removing them, temporarily at least, as an opponent.

If there's more than one opponent then find some way to get them fighting each other thus consuming their time and resources.

If all else fails then create a crisis in an area you know more about than your opponents. Doesn't matter what it is so long as it changes the focus to something you know more about than your opponents thus giving you an opportunity to appear as competent.

Pretty much the standard actions of anyone who's supposed to lead something but lacks the skills required to do so.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 October 2017)

Smurf1976 said:


> Pretty much the standard actions of anyone who's supposed to lead something but lacks the skills required to do so.




Yep. I had high hopes for Turnbull a while ago. 

Another poster, wiser than I said he was a dud and that's the way he's turned out. A smart aleck city lawyer who thinks he's clever enough to take his courtroom baloney into the public domain and convince people that black is white. 

People have now seen through him. Barring a disaster on the other side I think he and his government are dead meat.


----------



## PZ99 (26 October 2017)

If only phony Tony could join the Cory Tory party it would be a fair fight all round!


----------



## SirRumpole (26 October 2017)

PZ99 said:


> If only phony Tony could join the Cory Tory party it would be a fair fight all round!




Not much in that for Tony, he's having too much fun as it is watching Turnbull squirm.


----------



## PZ99 (26 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Not much in that for Tony, he's having too much fun as it is watching Turnbull squirm.



My view is it's the only way Tony will keep his seat. The Cory Tory party has the money to back him for an election. The Liberal Party does not. They almost went broke trying to save that seat in 2016 and they sure as hell won't be doing that again with all the marginals they have to defend.

We need to remember that Turnbull is far more popular than Shorten and could win easy if it wasn't for Tony Abbott's imbecilic behaviour.

They've lost my vote anyway after all that stuff about penalty rates.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 October 2017)

PZ99 said:


> My view is it's the only way Tony will keep his seat. The Cory Tory party has the money to back him for an election. The Liberal Party does not. They almost went broke trying to save that seat in 2016 and they sure as hell won't be doing that again with all the marginals they have to defend.
> 
> We need to remember that Turnbull is far more popular than Shorten and could win easy if it wasn't for Tony Abbott's imbecilic behaviour.
> 
> They've lost my vote anyway after all that stuff about penalty rates.




I'm not sure if the leadership popularity means all that much. Labor may do better under someone else but they will win even if Shorten is the leader. Changing horses now will damage them I think unless something nasty comes out against Shorten.


----------



## wayneL (27 October 2017)

The next election is going to be like deciding which knacker you want cut off with a rusty pocket knife. 

That is if you vote for majors. I will be voting to make it more interesting.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 October 2017)

wayneL said:


> The next election is going to be like deciding which knacker you want cut off with a rusty pocket knife.
> 
> That is if you vote for majors. I will be voting to make it more interesting.




Voting Green eh Wayne ?


----------



## wayneL (27 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Voting Green eh Wayne ?



I would rather cut both off


----------



## Tisme (27 October 2017)

So now the AFP are going to "investigate" the leaks to get the monkey off their backs, it will be  interesting to see how they manage to blame Bill Shorten.

Collusion or no, they seem to be the LNP's goto man for their hate ALP hobby horses


----------



## SirRumpole (27 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> So now the AFP are going to "investigate" the leaks to get the monkey off their backs, it will be  interesting to see how they manage to blame Bill Shorten.
> 
> Collusion or no, they seem to be the LNP's goto man for their hate ALP hobby horses




If the Libs put too much heat on Shorten he may decide to step aside and put in someone like Bowen or Albo (please God not Tanya), who will be less of a target.

The Libs should be careful what they wish for.


----------



## wayneL (27 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> (please God not Tanya), .



On that point,  we are in complete agreement


----------



## Tisme (27 October 2017)

wayneL said:


> On that point,  we are in complete agreement



 Tripartite !!!!!!!


she'd have ours and every other males knackers if unchained


----------



## PZ99 (27 October 2017)

Righto Barnaby...

You'll have to do it all again bro 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-...livers-judgement-on-citizenship-seven/9085032

The High Court will begin reading out its judgements at *2:15pm* (AEDT)
*Barnaby Joyce* (Nationals), *Malcolm Roberts* (One Nation), *Larissa Waters* (Greens), *Fiona Nash* (Nationals), and *Scott Ludlam* (Greens) are disqualified
*Nick Xenophon* (NXT) and *Matthew Canavan* (Nationals) are safe
There will now be a *by-election *in Barnaby Joyce's seat of New England
The Government loses its one-seat majority until after that by-election


----------



## moXJO (27 October 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Righto Barnaby...
> 
> You'll have to do it all again bro
> 
> ...



Windsor must be jizzing in his pants


----------



## PZ99 (27 October 2017)

moXJO said:


> Windsor must be jizzing in his pants



And he must also be happy that Joyce lost the case


----------



## wayneL (27 October 2017)

I wonder,  if we went back through say 50 years,  who else was ineligible,  but never got busted?


----------



## drsmith (28 October 2017)

I'm surprised Tony Windsor's isn't having another crack at the seat. From what I saw on TV news coverage yesterday evening, he looked like he was itching for another battle with his old foe the Nats.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 October 2017)

drsmith said:


> I'm surprised Tony Windsor's isn't having another crack at the seat. From what I saw on TV news coverage yesterday evening, he looked like he was itching for another battle with his old foe the Nats.





This may explain.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-...ll-not-run-in-new-england-by-election/9093812


----------



## drsmith (28 October 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> This may explain.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-...ll-not-run-in-new-england-by-election/9093812



He's very much itching to be back in politics. Perhaps he rates if prospects as better running for the the senate than for New England.


----------



## IFocus (28 October 2017)

drsmith said:


> He's very much itching to be back in politics. Perhaps he rates if prospects as better running for the the senate than for New England.




Windsor was suffering health issues when last in he may be gun shy from that


----------



## SirRumpole (28 October 2017)

drsmith said:


> He's very much itching to be back in politics. Perhaps he rates if prospects as better running for the the senate than for New England.




I think that's right. I'd give him an outside chance of winning New England, but probably a better chance of a Senate seat. He will waste no opportunity to rubbish the Nats though, deservedly imho.


----------



## IFocus (28 October 2017)

On a cheerier note what a mess the AWU thing

Bolt.....yes Bolt thinks it a awful look to be perusing your political opposition by using government institutions.

Apparently the AWU were not holding back documents.


----------



## Tisme (28 October 2017)

IFocus said:


> On a cheerier note what a mess the AWU thing
> 
> Bolt.....yes Bolt thinks it a awful look to be perusing your political opposition by using government institutions.
> 
> Apparently the AWU were not holding back documents.




The ROC is the remanufactured spinoff of the  union busting legislation and is setup to police the reporting laws/amendments since federation regarding associations and unions. It can look inside a registered organisation, whereas the ABCC can only look at the mechanics.

It's original incarnations were really paper tigers, but under the LNP it is a bludgeon to ignore business associations and belt unions/ALP.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 October 2017)

Tisme said:


> The ROC is the remanufactured spinoff of the  union busting legislation and is setup to police the reporting laws/amendments since federation regarding associations and unions. It can look inside a registered organisation, whereas the ABCC can only look at the mechanics.
> 
> It's original incarnations were really paper tigers, but under the LNP it is a bludgeon to ignore business associations and belt unions/ALP.




Can it look inside private and public companies, partnerships etc ?


----------



## moXJO (28 October 2017)

IFocus said:


> Windsor was suffering health issues when last in he may be gun shy from that



Apparently his wife said "No".
Enough said.


----------



## dutchie (29 October 2017)

Turnbull is having a shocker and needs to go.

Despite this, a Labor government led by Shorten, is still 1000 times worse.


----------



## dutchie (29 October 2017)

Labor needs to replace Shorten with Albanese. Then they will be a shoe in at the next election.


----------



## bellenuit (29 October 2017)

dutchie said:


> Labor needs to replace Shorten with Albanese. Then they will be a shoe in at the next election.




Wouldn't it look great on the world stage if the prime minister of Australia is unable to correctly pronounce the name of the country he is prime minister of? Have you ever heard Albanese: Austraya.


----------



## dutchie (29 October 2017)

bellenuit said:


> Wouldn't it look great on the world stage if the prime minister of Australia is unable to correctly pronounce the name of the country he is prime minister of? Have you ever heard Albanese: Austraya.




Albanese's speech impediment is better than Shorten's brain impediment.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 October 2017)

dutchie said:


> Albanese's speech impediment is better than Shorten's brain impediment.




The Labor Party is doing pretty well in the polls with Shorten compared to the smart ass lawyer of the Libs.


----------



## Tisme (29 October 2017)

Remember which leaders allowed this into our country in the name of freedom:


----------



## Tisme (2 November 2017)

Little wonder Australia has hit the skids. The place is being governed by a bunch of foreigners.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 November 2017)

Maybe we should go back to a monarchy.


----------



## Tisme (2 November 2017)

As if ASIO wouldn't know who qualifies and who doesn't


----------



## sptrawler (2 November 2017)

Well it is great to see that something, upsets reporters, and makes them question politicians arrogance.

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...ing-the-citizenship-show-20171031-gzc76f.html

What about the arrogance of their perks, their exemptions from punitive superannuation tax rules, stating they will ignore the wishes of the same sex marriage polls if it isn't what they want?
The examples go on and on, and then they wonder why people vote for left field candidates like Trump, why wouldn't they vote for Trump?
They feel anything is better than more of the same, that's obvious.IMO


----------



## McLovin (2 November 2017)

Tisme said:


> As if ASIO wouldn't know who qualifies and who doesn't




Not what they're looking for, so they won't go looking. Even now, this is pretty small-bore for the intelligence guys.

Parry's inaction is disgraceful, especially at a time when trust in public institutions is so low. He should be forced to hand back at least a portion of his salary.


----------



## PZ99 (3 November 2017)

Josh Frydenberg is trying to determine if he is Hungary for power or a dual citizen 

http://www.news.com.au/national/pol...y/news-story/99ac66dd1269dcf91e8cb60db2361ab5

A *Hung*ary Parliment?


----------



## Tisme (3 November 2017)

https://www.9news.com.au/national/2...ure-chaos-doesn-t-turn-into-full-blown-crisis



> You know you are in trouble when you become a joke and the latest one in federal politics goes like this.
> 
> A Liberal Senator steps up to a podium to rally support for the Coalition in the looming Queensland poll.
> 
> ...


----------



## wayneL (3 November 2017)

Is Mal some sort of Manchurian candidate to take out the whole Godamn party? Is that what Labor was so keen on him?


----------



## sptrawler (3 November 2017)

wayneL said:


> Is Mal some sort of Manchurian candidate to take out the whole Godamn party? Is that what Labor was so keen on him?




Yes and now the SMH is suggesting Bishop, is the best candidate, that tells you she would be as big a disaster as Malcolm.
Fairfax and labor got Malcolm in, because they new he was a "bunny", they must be wetting themselves with laughter.IMO
Talk about" rope a dope", the LNP need to realise they aren't a Labor Party and grow up.


----------



## drsmith (3 November 2017)

Malcolm's most important test was to be able to unite the party after taking over the leadership and on that, he failed.


----------



## sptrawler (3 November 2017)

drsmith said:


> Malcolm's most important test was to be able to unite the party after taking over the leadership and on that, he failed.




Yes, the only ones he united, were the desperate and insecure ones.
He needs to step down, and give Morrison or a new blood a go, otherwise it will be death by a thousand cuts.IMO


----------



## SirRumpole (3 November 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Yes, the only ones he united, were the desperate and insecure ones.
> He needs to step down, and give Morrison or a new blood a go, otherwise it will be death by a thousand cuts.IMO




Turnbull, like Rudd is too arrogant to step down. Morrison is a loser as well.

Let's face it, two terms is about about all that people are prepared to give any government these days.

The days of Menzies like reigns are gone.


----------



## wayneL (3 November 2017)

sptrawler said:


> death by a thousand cuts.IMO



I suspect the Liberal party is finished. there is no cohesive ideology or apparent doctrine, apart from trying to ot Labor,  Labor. The vestiges of support more tribal devotion than ideological common ground. 

I  used to vote Liberal only because it wasn't Labor,  now I will vote for something that is neither (and diametrically opposed to the Marxist Greens).  I doubt I'll ever vote Liberal ever again.

Meanwhile, I'll derive a little pleasure fron the coming chaos.


----------



## Knobby22 (6 November 2017)

wayneL said:


> I suspect the Liberal party is finished. there is no cohesive ideology or apparent doctrine, apart from trying to ot Labor,  Labor. The vestiges of support more tribal devotion than ideological common ground.
> 
> I  used to vote Liberal only because it wasn't Labor,  now I will vote for something that is neither (and diametrically opposed to the Marxist Greens).  I doubt I'll ever vote Liberal ever again.
> 
> Meanwhile, I'll derive a little pleasure fron the coming chaos.




The Liberals have forgotten their own philosophy, most of the politicians are looking overseas for their beliefs, around a third are quasi British Conservatives and about a third are quasi USA republicans.


----------



## Smurf1976 (6 November 2017)

wayneL said:


> I suspect the Liberal party is finished. there is no cohesive ideology or apparent doctrine




Infrastructure falling apart, a hollowed out economy, extraordinary levels of debt, unaffordable housing, stagnant wages and so on.

It doesn’t surprise me in the slightest to see the two major parties struggling (at best) as the outcome of their policies becomes all to apparent.

When something is stuffed that’s when the arguing starts in earnest.


----------



## Logique (9 November 2017)

The Bernardi _Australian Conservatives_ and the Hanson's  _One Nation _will do record business next election, wait and see.

Many Australian voters will say of the two major parties, ".._a pox on both their houses_"


----------



## Logique (12 November 2017)

Have Turnbull and Julie Bishop swapped places.  Malcolm swanning around the world having the '..time of his life', doubtless to the envy of The Loyal Deputy. 

Meanwhile the Coalition disintegrates like a slow motion train wreck.


----------



## Tisme (13 November 2017)

Night of the long knives on the agenda for Malcolm.

Next up ...?


----------



## SirRumpole (13 November 2017)

Tisme said:


> Night of the long knives on the agenda for Malcolm.
> 
> Next up ...?




I think he'll survive. There are two years untill the next election and I don't think that the Libs will ditch him this early.


----------



## Tisme (13 November 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I think he'll survive. There are two years untill the next election and I don't think that the Libs will ditch him this early.




I'm being bombarded with an upswing Julie Bishop tweets.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 November 2017)

sptrawler said:


> Yes and now the SMH is suggesting Bishop, is the best candidate, that tells you she would be as big a disaster as Malcolm.
> Fairfax and labor got Malcolm in, because they new he was a "bunny", they must be wetting themselves with laughter.IMO
> Talk about" rope a dope", the LNP need to realise they aren't a Labor Party and grow up.




Who is your ideal choice ?


----------



## Blennie (13 November 2017)

Is anybody else out there totally fed up with the whole political scene at present?  The choices are woefully inadequate - a castrated coalition that can't get anything done and a Labor party who are hell bent at destroying our economy any time they get their hands on it.  Also, who else is sick and tired of the slowly strangulating regulation of everything {OH&S} where to actually build anything is an absolute miracle.  Who out there voted for the greatest change to our urban landscape - chopping up our once generous landscape into tiny parcels of land that are so small you cannot now grow a tree in your back yard?  Cramming more and more people into an ever tightening parcel of land with increasing congestion of our road network is not the way I want to live but our Councils can't believe their luck - more rate payers without having to do anything in return.  If I wanted to live in a sardine can, I could move to any country in South East Asia.  All these and more trends are what make the political process a farce.  

I have a totally radical thought: *Why not bring back Real Democracy?* 

For those who have no idea what that is, it is where a position which is held by >=50% of the population is enacted into law. Eg regarding euthanasia, when >50% of the population want it, we get it.  If we want gay, lesbian and I cannot quite make up my mind what to think about my sexuality to get married, then get >50% of the population to vote on it.  If they don't, then shut up about it!  For too long we have been living by the rule of "He who has the microphone is in charge". That's not democracy, that is something else. 

Australia is ruled by two versions of parasites.  Labour {i.e. Trade Unions} are parasites in the biological sense that they are organisms that cannot survive on their own initiative but instead have to identify a healthy host on which to pray to extract 100% of their nourishment.  Liberals {i.e. Lawyers} are also parasites because you don't see law firms actually making anything - except law firms.  Two versions of parasites and you end up with what parasitism delivers in nature - consumption, slow strangulation and ultimate death to both host and parasite.  

Our nearest neighbour {New Zealand} is not run by parasites, instead it has been run by business people who understand that first of all, if at the end of the financial year you aren's showing a profit, you need to fold and close shop.  That's not good for anybody and so a first principle is to make sure the bills get paid and there is money left over for a rainy day.  That is why the NZ budget has been in surplus for > 10 years.  We have a spectacular Federal debt that seems to keep growing.

My vote would be to form a totally fresh political party with some basic platforms as follows:

*Enshrine the principle of democracy*.  >= 50% of the vote is all it takes to get something approved. < 50% and you can make as much noise as possible but nobody will listen to you. 
*Restore "Natural" balance* between Authority and Responsibility.  If you are not in Authority, then you cannot be held Responsible.  e.g. Airline pilots share both as soon as you hop onto a plane.  Prison guards also are the same - simultaneously responsible for prisoner welfare but in absolute authority.  This is a healthy "Natural" position.  Doctors who get sued by their stupid angry patients who refuse to take their suggestions and silly parents who drive Teachers nuts for non-compliance are examples of an "Unnatural" imbalance between Authority and Responsibility.  In neither case do the agents {Doctors and Teachers} have any authority, but they are totally responsible.  This is an unhealthy situation and needs to be corrected. 
*Make the transition from parasitism to symbiosis* at all levels.  This means, removing the dominance of those who live by a parasitic model, i.e. Lawyers, Trade Unionists and Pensioners.  Instead of sit down money for doing nothing, get pensioners to work "WITH" society and give something back. That way, their self-esteem grows, our society benefits from the fruits of their labours, the drug traffickers will be starved of their major income stream and everyone else benefits.  It is not a one-way interaction but a much better way is a two-way interaction.  Biological examples of symbiosis are our mixed eucalyptus / acacia forests are the Great Barrier Reef - the only single biological structure that is visible from space. Parasitism produces nothing, only destruction. In the human experience, parasitism produces palaces for gambling {Casinos}, Trade Union and Lawyer business houses. 
*Root out hypocrisy.*  Hypocrisy is everywhere and it needs to be identified and worked out of our system.  For example, we happily allow over 100,000 perfectly healthy foetuses to be put to death {because the woman carrying the foetus doesn't feel like raising a child} but we spend billions looking after vegetative state individuals with severe brain damage, dementia and other progressive and irreversible medical conditions with absolutely no hope of recovery and do not have the courage to enact euthanasia. We also spend billions of dollars on IVF but waste the potential of an inexhaustible supply of healthy foetuses who mostly will become healthy babies to supply couples who have a natural problem with raising babies on their own.  This hypocrisy has to stop.  If we have such callous disregard for life in its earliest stages, why do we insist on holding onto life when "humanity" has left the body?  In this case, we have let the Lawyers dictate our thinking by coming up with some claptrap that a foetus <23 weeks of age is not viable by itself and therefore abortion is OK.  Well the same logic applied to adults could go like this:  If I take you into the air and open up the cabin door at 30,000 feet and push you out, you won't survive.  If I sail in a submarine and push you out at 500 meters below the surface and push you out, you won't survive.  Therefore, any adult is not viable and it is OK to have them put down.  Silly logic is absolutely ridiculous but that is the "logical" basis behind our rationalisation of abortion. This is a prime example of hypocrisy which needs to be slowly removed from our institutionalisation. 
*Wind back the silly OH&S laws* that make a workplace unworkable but preserve the general safety of workers.  Accept that life is risky and you cannot legislate for 100% safety.  That's what insurance policies are for.  For goodness sake, let's get on and make useful stuff in the meanwhile. 
Give it a catchy name like: *THE REAL DEMOCRACY PARTY.*
Whatever you do, don't ask me to lead it.  I'm too busy making stuff and having fun.


----------



## luutzu (13 November 2017)

Blennie said:


> Is anybody else out there totally fed up with the whole political scene at present?  The choices are woefully inadequate - a castrated coalition that can't get anything done and a Labor party who are hell bent at destroying our economy any time they get their hands on it.  Also, who else is sick and tired of the slowly strangulating regulation of everything {OH&S} where to actually build anything is an absolute miracle.  Who out there voted for the greatest change to our urban landscape - chopping up our once generous landscape into tiny parcels of land that are so small you cannot now grow a tree in your back yard?  Cramming more and more people into an ever tightening parcel of land with increasing congestion of our road network is not the way I want to live but our Councils can't believe their luck - more rate payers without having to do anything in return.  If I wanted to live in a sardine can, I could move to any country in South East Asia.  All these and more trends are what make the political process a farce.
> 
> I have a totally radical thought: *Why not bring back Real Democracy?*
> 
> ...




We plebs are meant to be spectators, not participants. Important decisions should be left to the adults in the room. So better get used to turning up and ticking boxes.

It is the duty of responsible men of destiny to make (inept and often corrupt) decisions for the rest of the stupid masses. Leaving such important decisions like war, peace, environmental protection, social welfare, health, education and the idiotic masses will all want peace, "free" stuff their tax dollars paid for daily, clean air and water because they can't afford bottled and filtered sources... 

I mean, how will corporations and our fine elite get their annual tax breaks and subsidies if the troublesome masses also get their taxes re-distributed among themselves? Bring back their holdings from Paradise and pay their share of taxes?

To ask for real democracy is like asking the Comrades to let the People decide and control things because "the People" is written everywhere in the official documents.


----------



## wayneL (13 November 2017)

luutzu said:


> We plebs are meant to be spectators, not participants. Important decisions should be left to the adults in the room. So better get used to turning up and ticking boxes.
> 
> It is the duty of responsible men of destiny to make (inept and often corrupt) decisions for the rest of the stupid masses. Leaving such important decisions like war, peace, environmental protection, social welfare, health, education and the idiotic masses will all want peace, "free" stuff their tax dollars paid for daily, clean air and water because they can't afford bottled and filtered sources...
> 
> ...



Bullshyte.

One word - Switzerland


----------



## IFocus (13 November 2017)

Blennie said:


> *Wind back the silly OH&S laws* that make a workplace unworkable but preserve the general safety of workers.  Accept that life is risky and you cannot legislate for 100% safety.  That's what insurance policies are for.  For goodness sake, let's get on and make useful stuff in the meanwhile.




This is complete rubbish you clearly never had to work for a living on sites where good people died through no fault of their own I have and it was really fu(ked. Thanks to Unions governments were forced into OH&S laws where this is now a rarity.


----------



## qldfrog (13 November 2017)

IFocus said:


> This is complete rubbish you clearly never had to work for a living on sites where good people died through no fault of their own I have and it was really fu(ked. Thanks to Unions governments were forced into OH&S laws where this is now a rarity.



IFocus, if you are still living on sites (in my case mining) you will also know the balance has been pushed too far and there are ridiculous H&S attitude which in my opinion remove responsabilities and actually end up being dangerous; we have also seen the desmise of something called common sense.
How many inductions have ytou done in the last 3 months of work (half a dozen for me) which are usually pointless..during the same time, australians are drugged on prescribed medecine, commit suicide at a record levels.And how many death will our dying economy cause ? depression for breadwinner unable to find a job ? These are the real questions
we do not need to go down to the lowest denominator but we need H&S/work relation  not to be a gravy train for so many


----------



## SirRumpole (13 November 2017)

qldfrog said:


> IFocus, if you are still living on sites (in my case mining) you will also know the balance has been pushed too far and there are ridiculous H&S attitude which in my opinion remove responsabilities and actually end up being dangerous; we have also seen the desmise of something called common sense.
> How many inductions have ytou done in the last 3 months of work (half a dozen for me) which are usually pointless..during the same time, australians are drugged on prescribed medecine, commit suicide at a record levels.And how many death will our dying economy cause ? depression for breadwinner unable to find a job ? These are the real questions
> we do not need to go down to the lowest denominator but we need H&S/work relation  not to be a gravy train for so many




I propose we eliminate all OH&S rules and instead pass a law that requires mandatory 20 year gaol sentences for all board members of  companies that lose workers in workplace accidents if a trial indicates that they have been negligent.


----------



## luutzu (13 November 2017)

wayneL said:


> Bullshyte.
> 
> One word - Switzerland




It is BS. Was just saying what the ruling class the world over thinks of democracy and the common peasant and their needs.

We don't even need to go into the detail of any policy... just compare the wages or living condition of the majority in our greatest of great civilisation. 

If it's a democracy where the will of the many are carried out, why the heck is it that the many keep on asking for tax hike, less social services and more wars on countries and people they would have problem pointing to on a map.

Our own treasurer of the people said a few weeks ago that cutting corporate tax is a top priority. I guess he's looking after the interest of mom and pop investors who have a few shares in all them corporations.

Or take Trump's proposed tax "reform"... with some 75% of the benefit goes to the top .1 of 1%. Not sure if that estimate includes the corporate tax holiday.

Western Democracies are getting to the point where the ruling class can't hide behind "democracy", freedom and all that goodness anymore. We're fast running out of refugees and Muslims to distract the fascists from what's really been going on. 

That and most politicians don't even bothered to pretend that the voters mattered. 

Look at recent elections... only half the Yanks bothered to vote. Those that voted pick a racist, sexist a hole because his bs sounds a bit more believable than the political establishment.

Or France's Macron... heard an interview with that former Greek Finance Minister who say that only some 25% to 30% of the French voted for Macron; 30% turned up but wreck their vote on purpose; most of the rest goes to a fascist party. 

Anywho... the good news is that Australians are generally more easy going, less patriotic... and we're a few years behind the rest of the world so our politicians and the oligarchs can quickly reverse course the moment Europe or the US or Asia goes to heck, again.


----------



## sptrawler (13 November 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Who is your ideal choice ?




My bets would be a younger up and coming prospect, it really is time to move on from the elders IMO, Morrison has missed the boat, Abbott has also past his window of opportunity, same with Bishop.
I think they need to start with the next generation, we are 10 years past the GFC, time to change the old guard, technology and ideology has moved on.


----------



## IFocus (13 November 2017)

qldfrog said:


> IFocus, if you are still living on sites (in my case mining) you will also know the balance has been pushed too far and there are ridiculous H&S attitude which in my opinion remove responsabilities and actually end up being dangerous; we have also seen the desmise of something called common sense.
> How many inductions have ytou done in the last 3 months of work (half a dozen for me) which are usually pointless..during the same time, australians are drugged on prescribed medecine, commit suicide at a record levels.And how many death will our dying economy cause ? depression for breadwinner unable to find a job ? These are the real questions
> we do not need to go down to the lowest denominator but we need H&S/work relation  not to be a gravy train for so many




I feel your pain  I unfortunately am still working on a chemical plant site in the top 20 or 10 most hazardous in Australia the hazards are real and people still do really stupid things some are honest mistakes others are sheer lazy. 

But H&S helps everyone one to go home in one peace having been seen (in the 70/80's mining) fatality's and working life ending incidents I am happy to cop the rules.

These days its insurance premiums  /  site manager company  prosecutions / and to a smaller degree ligation that drives the processes.

Final note that its well known  company's with good / robust safety systems plan and organised work / tasks  better.


----------



## PZ99 (14 November 2017)

OH&S laws aren't the problem - it's the people who abuse them for their advantage.
Unions frequently use it as a weapon against productivity. Employers use it as a power trip.
Either way they are there because of previous failures of process that can't be ignored.

@Blennie , you have some funny ideas mate


----------



## qldfrog (14 November 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Unions frequently use it as a weapon against productivity. Employers use it as a power trip.
> Either way they are there because of previous failures of process that can't be ignored.
> 
> @Blennie , you have some funny ideas mate



PS do not take me wrong, I am not a rabid anti union or anti H&S advocate, I wear PPE when working on my block, but i do not need a harnest working 1.2m above ground.Productivity in mining in Oz has been falling for years and ridiculous H&S  rules are partly to blame, and in the mean time black lungs arte back, 
So common sense/brain for worker's own area of responsability and proper site H&S for matters which are important and are site wide (like dust control) 
Anyway, I am a proponent of self responsability and minimum external interference for a working society be it government or company so that probably reflects
But who cares, what is important it seems is whether your parents moved in from the UK before a certain date...How do the current main parties expect to be considered with this citizenship saga?
And during that time the world is moving faster than ever leaving us behind


----------



## PZ99 (14 November 2017)

qldfrog said:


> PS do not take me wrong, I am not a rabid anti union or anti H&S advocate, I wear PPE when working on my block, but i do not need a harnest working 1.2m above ground.Productivity in mining in Oz has been falling for years and ridiculous H&S  rules are partly to blame, and in the mean time black lungs arte back,
> So common sense/brain for worker's own area of responsability and proper site H&S for matters which are important and are site wide (like dust control)
> Anyway, I am a proponent of self responsability and minimum external interference for a working society be it government or company so that probably reflects
> But who cares, what is important it seems is whether your parents moved in from the UK before a certain date...How do the current main parties expect to be considered with this citizenship saga?
> And during that time the world is moving faster than ever leaving us behind



I share / applaud your values of self responsibility. I think the real problem is we live in a 60 minute style limp wristed world of litigation where employers / unions / staff are forced to be so pedantic that it's a pain in the appendix and turning this country into a nation of pussies.

Example: I could slip on a chip and sue the supermarket if I needed money for a holiday because the law allows it and the insurance fraternity enjoys the huge profits it generates.

The citizenship saga is great for the media but the end game for unwilling participants is likely to be increased popularity from sympathetic voters at a by election. Which is probably why more MPs are stepping up


----------



## moXJO (14 November 2017)

Ohs laws are to protect stupid workers. Which is pretty much all of them. I agree that its a parasitic industry, full of tossers with an ego trip. If anyone remembers the 90s then they would remember all the workerscomp scams going on. Employees throwing themselves off scaff to claim back injuries. Or whole families on workers comp because they all scammed the system. 
Thats part of the reason why the laws are strict now. Too many scammers.


----------



## Tisme (14 November 2017)

moXJO said:


> Ohs laws are to protect stupid workers. Which is pretty much all of them. I agree that its a parasitic industry, full of tossers with an ego trip. If anyone remembers the 90s then they would remember all the workerscomp scams going on. Employees throwing themselves off scaff to claim back injuries. Or whole families on workers comp because they all scammed the system.
> Thats part of the reason why the laws are strict now. Too many scammers.





It also provides jobs for white collar workers and mono syllabic site managers who delight in making rules that can be policed thus making more progress sapping activity for their non productive and boring existence.


----------



## drsmith (14 November 2017)

Labor has rolled out former NSW Labor premier Kristina Keneally as its candidate for the upcoming Bennelong by-election.


----------



## moXJO (14 November 2017)

drsmith said:


> Labor has rolled out former NSW Labor premier Kristina Keneally as its candidate for the upcoming Bennelong by-election.




Eddies prize poodle.
Good luck with that...


----------



## Tisme (14 November 2017)

moXJO said:


> Eddies prize poodle.
> Good luck with that...


----------



## moXJO (15 November 2017)

Tisme said:


> View attachment 73461



If libs lose the seat to her,  then they are in real trouble. I'd be surprised if anyone but the diehards give her a tick.

On another note Bill Shorten is looking a bit like golem in a suit of late. Stress must be getting to him.


----------



## Tisme (15 November 2017)

moXJO said:


> If libs lose the seat to her,  then they are in real trouble. I'd be surprised if anyone but the diehards give her a tick.
> 
> On another note Bill Shorten is looking a bit like golem in a suit of late. Stress must be getting to him.





She has everything going for her in the Labor Movement: female & rabid feminist.... everything right there that the ALP stands for except she may not fill the trifecta because of outward heterosexuality.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 November 2017)

An excellent analysis of why this country is going backwards despite job creation, and our reliance on the immigration Ponzi scheme.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-...ont-be-get-a-bump-in-pay-anytime-soon/9166906


----------



## Tisme (20 November 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> An excellent analysis of why this country is going backwards despite job creation, and our reliance on the immigration Ponzi scheme.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-...ont-be-get-a-bump-in-pay-anytime-soon/9166906




For a man who supposedly knows business, if Malcolm was complicit chairman of a company that increased it's shareholders debt from $184bn to $595bn since 2013 he'd be getting the heave ho. If his company workforce had stagnated into a moribund gang who had no incentive to keep a job other paying off their mortgages he'd be looking for ways to increase industry and growth instead of telling stories how it was someone else's fault. If he replaced the jobs with 417s eventually his business would fail through lack of workforce cohesion. If the company IT dept had opted for the cheapest and cobbled together "framework" he presumably would be demanding to know why it wasn't future proofed to cater for the fastest growing and profitable industry

The LNP/Malcolm has failed to deliver much of anything except blaming Bill Shorten, Labor States and any other commo bogeymen he can think up, but becomes MR Whimpy when it comes to casting Abbott, his real nemesis, out.


----------



## Logique (21 November 2017)

Plenty of rumours flying around, such as a Bishop/Morrison ticket.

I'd keep an eye on the loyal deputy from this point.


----------



## PZ99 (21 November 2017)

They must want Bennelong real bad if that's true. I'm up for a Bishop/Morrison Govt for as long as they side with the workers and reinstate those damn penalty rates.

This MP threatening to quit... it's not Tony Abbott is it ?


----------



## Tisme (21 November 2017)

PZ99 said:


> They must want Bennelong real bad if that's true. I'm up for a Bishop/Morrison Govt for as long as they side with the workers and reinstate those damn penalty rates.
> 
> This MP threatening to quit... it's not Tony Abbott is it ?





Speculation it's Andrews moving into Cory's party, so the right can lever a leadership change and bring the two of them back as leader (Cory) and deputy (Kevin). Kill off the SSM in the process.


----------



## PZ99 (21 November 2017)

They are better off collecting ALL the conservatives and dropping them off at the Cory Tory party. That way, they can attain their relevancy and political capital from their own work and ideals instead of hijacking the LNP and undermining the Govt.


----------



## Tisme (21 November 2017)

PZ99 said:


> They are better off collecting ALL the conservatives and dropping them off at the Cory Tory party. That way, they can attain their relevancy and political capital from their own work and ideals instead of hijacking the LNP and undermining the Govt.





It's interesting how they eat their own and just how vicious they would have been to Rudd and Gillard as their sworn enemies. Gillard must have been a great negotiator to get legislation through.


----------



## Logique (21 November 2017)

PZ99 said:


> They must want Bennelong real bad if that's true. I'm up for a Bishop/Morrison Govt for as long as they side with the workers and reinstate those damn penalty rates.
> This MP threatening to quit... it's *not Tony Abbott* is it ?



Doubt it, TA is a strong party loyalist.

Bennelong by-election is pivotal in my view.  I don't see the PM surviving a strong result for the ALP, and Labor's Kristina Keneally is a candidate with plenty of appeal.


----------



## drsmith (21 November 2017)

Tisme said:


> Gillard must have been a great negotiator to get legislation through.



This revision of history seems to rear its ugly head from time to time.

The Gillard government was a minority government formed with the support of the Greens and a number of independents. Labor with the Greens had a majority in the Senate during that term.


----------



## drsmith (21 November 2017)

The biggest failing of the Turnbull government has been the PM's inability to unite the party after taking the leadership from Tony Abbott and the that division is only getting worse.

The way things are going, the Coalition is heading for a defeat at the next election approaching the scale of the Libs in the WA state election earlier this year. Another leadership coup isn't the answer. A more dignified leadership transition needs to be facilitated.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 November 2017)

drsmith said:


> The biggest failing of the Turnbull government has been the PM's inability to unite the party after taking the leadership from Tony Abbott and the that division is only getting worse.




I think the real problem is a small group who stick to a staunch Conservative line rather than feeling the nation's pulse, and of course the reliance on political donations from corporations that enslaves their policy.

The one chance the Libs have got of getting my vote is to reform political donations to voting citizens only with a $500 per year maximum. That takes out corporations, unions and other rent seekers and gives the power back to the people.

Chances of that happening ? Zilch.


----------



## IFocus (21 November 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I think the real problem is a small group who stick to a staunch Conservative line rather than feeling the nation's pulse, and of course the reliance on political donations from corporations that enslaves their policy.




Nice summary, add the influence and division by the staunch Conservative (extreme right  ) is far and away greater than represented in the community.

Abbott has been a disaster hanging around has done a great inside job on Turnbull .....no sniping, no wreaking


----------



## SirRumpole (22 November 2017)

Political donations in disguise ?

What a crock.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/20...rds-barnaby-joyce-40-thousand-dollars/9178612


----------



## PZ99 (22 November 2017)

"A spokesperson has said he will decline the money". So fair's fair


----------



## SirRumpole (22 November 2017)

PZ99 said:


> "A spokesperson has said he will decline the money". So fair's fair




He could take it and donate it to charity, even better.


----------



## Tisme (22 November 2017)

PZ99 said:


> "A spokesperson has said he will decline the money". So fair's fair





Yeah right of course he did


----------



## PZ99 (22 November 2017)

All he has to do now is ask for a cheque from Rupert Murdoch so he can decline that too


----------



## Tisme (22 November 2017)

PZ99 said:


> All he has to do now is ask for a cheque from Rupert Murdoch so he can decline that too




Rupert would probably expense his contribution as goods and services rendered to a political charity, rather than have money changing hands which could attract FBT, rather than a tax offset.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 November 2017)

> Barnaby Joyce has handed back a $40,000 award from billionaire supporter Gina Rinehart, after an embarrassing backlash from political opponents and the farming industry.
> 
> *Key points:*
> 
> ...




My bold italics.


----------



## PZ99 (22 November 2017)

I like this bit > "The award polarised many in the room, with reactions among the hundreds of guests varying from approval to vehement opposition."

A no win situation. 

I'm going to buy a $40,000 bottle of 1951 Penfolds Grange and send it to Tony Abbott


----------



## SirRumpole (27 November 2017)

Are the moves for a bank enquiry irresistable ?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-27/how-bad-are-our-banks/9194984


----------



## Logique (28 November 2017)

Turnbull, gone let's face it.  Abbott could save some furniture, but why would he?

Unlikely for Adani in QLD.  Hard times coming for Australia, not least electricity prices


----------



## PZ99 (28 November 2017)

It was Abbott who burned the furniture in the first place and not content with being sent to his room for his "arson around" he then proceeded to blow up the neighborhood as well.

Most people believe Tony Abbott should resign from parliament and that's the only election winning chance the Coalition have regardless of who the leader is.


----------



## Logique (29 November 2017)

Then these aren't people with any understanding of the party base.

Not that Abbott was perfect last time round, far from it.  Mind you, he had Turnbull and his hand maidens constantly white-anting him.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 November 2017)

Logique said:


> Then these aren't people with any understanding of the party base.




So who is the Liberal Party's base ?

They seem to have diminished rapidly over the last few years.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 November 2017)

The banks have written to the government *requesting *an enquiry into the banking system to settle concerns about the industry, ABC TV reports.

Interesting to see what follows. It's a slap in eye for Turnbull's obstinate refusals to do anything in this area.


----------



## PZ99 (30 November 2017)

Yeah well... the bank shares went up some 2-3% everywhere else except here where they barely moved. The inaction is undermining the industry IMO.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/banks-the-road-to-ruin.33621/#post-966544


----------



## SirRumpole (30 November 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> The banks have written to the government *requesting *an enquiry into the banking system to settle concerns about the industry, ABC TV reports.
> 
> Interesting to see what follows. It's a slap in eye for Turnbull's obstinate refusals to do anything in this area.




Watch out for the terms of reference. It could turn out to be a whitewash.


----------



## PZ99 (30 November 2017)

Turnbull has caved in.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/bank...rnment-to-set-up-inquiry-20171129-gzvlfr.html


----------



## Tisme (30 November 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Turnbull has caved in.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/business/bank...rnment-to-set-up-inquiry-20171129-gzvlfr.html





Using the Sam Dastyari smoke to soften the backdown.


----------



## Tisme (30 November 2017)

Dastyari has issued statement in the Senate to explain he has never had security briefings. Let alone release them to the Chinese.

He has resigned his Senate management position.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 November 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Turnbull has caved in.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/business/bank...rnment-to-set-up-inquiry-20171129-gzvlfr.html




I think that the banks have convinced him that it's better for them to have an enquiry under an LNP government where they can be gone soft on instead of under a Labor government when the knives will really go in.


----------



## Tisme (30 November 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I think that the banks have convinced him that it's better for them to have an enquiry under an LNP government where they can be gone soft on instead of under a Labor government when the knives will really go in.





No it was to head of bad news about the industry before it happened later in the morning.


----------



## drsmith (30 November 2017)

Malcolm was certainly on happier turf talking about very naughty boy Samuel when the question about him came from a journalist.

Relatively speaking, ScoMo seemed less downbeat than MT. Malcolm looked very resigned about the whole thing.


----------



## sptrawler (30 November 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I think that the banks have convinced him that it's better for them to have an enquiry under an LNP government where they can be gone soft on instead of under a Labor government when the knives will really go in.




There is no winning with you guys, is there. lol


----------



## SirRumpole (30 November 2017)

sptrawler said:


> There is no winning with you guys, is there. lol




Not in cases of baldfaced hypocrisy.


----------



## sptrawler (30 November 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Not in cases of baldfaced hypocrisy.



Well it will be interesting to see what Labor do, when they get in. 
I didn't see them do much to the banks, when they were last in office.


----------



## drsmith (30 November 2017)

Draft terms of reference

https://www.pm.gov.au/sites/default/files/media/terms-of-reference.pdf


----------



## sptrawler (30 November 2017)

I personally think it is time Turnbull pulled up stumps, he has had a couple of goes and still doesn't cut.

Better all round if he moves over, and gives a new face time to settle into the big chair. IMO


----------



## Tisme (30 November 2017)

sptrawler said:


> I personally think it is time Turnbull pulled up stumps, he has had a couple of goes and still doesn't cut.
> 
> Better all round if he moves over, and gives a new face time to settle into the big chair. IMO




Sam perhaps?


----------



## PZ99 (30 November 2017)

sptrawler said:


> I personally think it is time Turnbull pulled up stumps, he has had a couple of goes and still doesn't cut.
> 
> Better all round if he moves over, and gives a new face time to settle into the big chair. IMO



Any nominations? I guess it comes down to Julie Bishop, ScoMo or Dutto.


----------



## sptrawler (30 November 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Any nominations? I guess it comes down to Julie Bishop, ScoMo or Dutto.



I think it is time for the next generation, there is very little talent on either side of politics, in the older brigade.


----------



## Tisme (30 November 2017)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DP10qoyVwAEG9kf.jpg:large


----------



## SirRumpole (30 November 2017)

What the banks don't want in the Royal Commission.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-...operty-lending-to-fall-under-scrutiny/9211376


----------



## Smurf1976 (30 November 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> So who is the Liberal Party's base ?
> 
> They seem to have diminished rapidly over the last few years.



Same could be said for Labor and the Greens.

Labor used to represent the workers, that's what the party was formed to do, but it would be hard to argue that this is still really the case today.

Greens used to stand up for the environment, the party itself is the direct descendant of an environmental group which got themselves into parliament, but apart from a few media releases they're not really in that space these days to anywhere near the extent they once were.

As for the Liberals, well the best I can work out is that they represent _some_ business interests but certainly not all business by any means. Sort of a boys club really - they'll look after you if you're in the club but aren't much help for the rest.

Thinking about it logically, having a party that represents labour, a party that represents capital and a party that represents the natural world seems a pretty logical thing to do since that covers all bases. 

They've all lost focus these days in my view so it's a case of "least bad" rather than any of them actually being good apart from the occasional independent who at least brings some intelligence into parliament (Andrew Wilkie comes immediately to mind there).


----------



## SirRumpole (30 November 2017)

Smurf1976 said:


> Thinking about it logically, having a party that represents labour, a party that represents capital and a party that represents the natural world seems a pretty logical thing to do since that covers all bases.




I've often thought that a "Consumer Party" would represent a far wider portion of the electorate since we are all consumers in one way or another but we don't have a party specifically representing us. As consumers run the economy, without consumers there is no business, the statement "what is good for consumers is good for the economy" is more easily defendable than "what is good for business is good for the economy" , as we are now finding out with stagnant wages and high non discretionary bills a significant drain on the economy. 

Trouble with the Labor Party is that you still have to be a union member to be a member of the Labor Party. So if you are self employed tradie, small business owner, professional person , retiree or a stay at home parent the Labor Party is not interested in your opinion. They will take your vote but you can't contribute to their policy. So myopic.

As for the Libs, they only represent big business these days. They may have represented aspirational middle class voters at one stage, but now they are just interested in privatisation and setting themselves up as company directors after they retire.

The Greens are still working themselves out. They are valuable as an environmental and social conscience but as for having economic credibility, I don't think so.

As for the Nats, their only interest is BIG agri business, small farmers mean nothing to them.

The best politicians are independents imo. Peter Andren, Tony Windsor, Wilkie as you mentioned, Oakeshot, Xenophon could hold an electorate on their own merit without party support. They acted directly for their electorates. Maybe that denies them the ability to vote in the national interest if it would negatively affect their vote, but that would be rather rare.

Anyway, nothing will change until the corrupt political donations laws are changed. It's too easy for politicians to be seduced by big money, the man on the street voters just don't rate with them.


----------



## Tisme (1 December 2017)

Why am I not surprised that the scope will widen to include extra scrutiny of union/industry based super funds.

I recall as far back as the 70's, our corporate super fund had union reps on committee alongside the executives. Strange how 40+ years later we still have the same old bogeyman, vote catching rubbish being peddled out by the LNP and in retaliation the ALP


----------



## Tisme (1 December 2017)

A Nats leader has publically asked for Malcolm to quit.

There is no leadership" "A coalition government in disarray" "I've lost all hope in the Prime Minister" "Turnbull is the problem" "He should step down" "go before Christmas"


----------



## PZ99 (1 December 2017)

If Turnbull is forced to step down he will probably quit politics altogether - forcing another by-election the Liberals could lose.

John Barilaro needs to decide.. can the NSW Govt work better with a Liberal or Labor Fed Govt?


----------



## Tisme (1 December 2017)

PZ99 said:


> If Turnbull is forced to step down he will probably quit politics altogether - forcing another by-election the Liberals could lose.
> 
> John Barilaro needs to decide.. can the NSW Govt work better with a Liberal or Labor Fed Govt?





I think they know they are deadmen walking. The push is on to devolve the LNP into independent parties once more to make the best of the voting preferences through three cornered contests.


----------



## Tisme (1 December 2017)

Doug Cameron getting stuck into the Michaelia Cash inquiry having a fixed result. If nothing else it's entertaining theatre.

https://www.aph.gov.au/News_and_Events/LiveMediaPlayer?vID={04666CA9-148F-4B60-806A-7FC65BCF4C42}


----------



## PZ99 (1 December 2017)

I hope he succeeds. Can't stand that Margaret Thatcher wannabee.


----------



## IFocus (1 December 2017)

Tisme said:


> Why am I not surprised that the scope will widen to include extra scrutiny of union/industry based super funds.
> 
> I recall as far back as the 70's, our corporate super fund had union reps on committee alongside the executives. Strange how 40+ years later we still have the same old bogeyman, vote catching rubbish being peddled out by the LNP and in retaliation the ALP




I wonder if they will point out the better returns and lower fees than the rape and pillage standard funds


----------



## IFocus (1 December 2017)

I thought it was nice of the banks to let the government hold the narrow focus short termed bank inquiry


----------



## sptrawler (3 December 2017)

Throwing out Turnbull must be a good idea, Fairfax thinks thinks they shouldn't do it.

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...t-axing-malcolm-turnbull-20171203-gzxmf5.html

Fairfax were the ones pushing to get him in, and it has been downhill ever since.


----------



## sptrawler (3 December 2017)

IFocus said:


> I thought it was nice of the banks to let the government hold the narrow focus short termed bank inquiry




As with most Royal Commissions, they end up blowing out in time and cost, can't wait to see this one play out.
The terms will be expanded, the time will be expanded and the cost will be expanded. IMO


----------



## SirRumpole (4 December 2017)

Bank Royal Commission another union bashing exercise ?

The retail super funds controlled by the banks are worried that industry super funds (with those dirty unions on the Board) give a better return for members.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-...mission-could-be-superannuation-sting/9221798

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-...n-industry-government-bill-criticised/9221778


----------



## PZ99 (4 December 2017)

PZ99 said:


> This MP threatening to quit... it's not Tony Abbott is it ?





Tisme said:


> Speculation it's Andrews moving into Cory's party, so the right can lever a leadership change and bring the two of them back as leader (Cory) and deputy (Kevin). Kill off the SSM in the process.



Turned out to be the round man of sound.

http://www.news.com.au/national/bre...p/news-story/37c723ff196410225c9215c4b4f5cba7


----------



## sptrawler (4 December 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Bank Royal Commission another union bashing exercise ?
> 
> The retail super funds controlled by the banks are worried that industry super funds (with those dirty unions on the Board) give a better return for members.
> 
> ...




It should prove, the industry funds are in fact better run than retail funds, so I think they will benefit from the commission.


----------



## Tisme (4 December 2017)

Malcolm in question time = he really comes across as a goose. The one child in the family who argues the ears off until no body can be bothered conversing


----------



## Tisme (5 December 2017)

Rather interesting when I looked into Malcolm's (and others) excuse of multiculturalism for changing the constitution regarding citizenship and nationality. Back in the day when the Federation ticket was on the table, there was a reasonable % of  non nationals in the population mix too.

A fairly deliberate clause seems as if they had wiser heads back in the day, if not certainly more time to contemplate the cause and effect of laws.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 December 2017)

Tisme said:


> Malcolm in question time = he really comes across as a goose. The one child in the family who argues the ears off until no body can be bothered conversing




A theatrical buffoon full of hot air.


----------



## PZ99 (5 December 2017)

Theatrical, yes. But that's the purpose of QT (at least the bits broadcasted) 

Bill Shorten sounds like a dalek.


----------



## Tisme (5 December 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Theatrical, yes. But that's the purpose of QT (at least the bits broadcasted)
> 
> Bill Shorten sounds like a dalek.





He does!! Good call


----------



## SirRumpole (5 December 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Theatrical, yes. But that's the purpose of QT (at least the bits broadcasted)
> 
> Bill Shorten sounds like a dalek.




I agree Bill sounds like a Dalek singing from a hymn book, but at least he's reasonably consistent.

He can take the credit for a bank enquiry, and is still 53-47 ahead in 2PP.


----------



## Tisme (5 December 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> I agree Bill sounds like a Dalek singing from a hymn book, but at least he's reasonably consistent.
> 
> He can take the credit for a bank enquiry, and is still 53-47 ahead in 2PP.





Yes he stays on song, which was contrary to his last two fair weather predecessors. Malcolm swings with the breeze, which is contrary to his last two predecessors.


----------



## Logique (6 December 2017)

That blue line looks a bearish trend to me. 

By Tim Blair, 4 Dec 2017:  https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/b...o/news-story/1738961718cd0f34b504f9e36d62538f


----------



## PZ99 (6 December 2017)

Logique said:


> That blue line looks a bearish trend to me.
> 
> By Tim Blair, 4 Dec 2017:  https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/b...o/news-story/1738961718cd0f34b504f9e36d62538f
> 
> View attachment 85081



Well you know what they say... triple bottom is the impetus of bullishness.

One more bottom to coincide with 30th loss, another change of leader and then a honeymoon


----------



## dutchie (7 December 2017)

Come on Malcolm, do something about the traitor Dastyari (as Shorten won't).

Kick him out of the country and pack him off to China!


----------



## Tisme (7 December 2017)

dutchie said:


> Come on Malcolm, do something about the traitor Dastyari (as Shorten won't).
> 
> Kick him out of the country and pack him off to China!





Won't happen. You know and we all know why Malcolm is all tiresome talk and no substance:

Saw this on facebook:


----------



## dutchie (7 December 2017)

Tisme said:


> Won't happen. You know and we all know why Malcolm is all tiresome talk and no substance:




True


----------



## dutchie (7 December 2017)

However, must give Turnbull credit for his stance on influence of China on our sovereignty.

By the look of the reaction from Beijing its well overdue.

Don't believe anything Chinese say.


----------



## Tisme (7 December 2017)

dutchie said:


> However, must give Turnbull credit for his stance on influence of China on our sovereignty.
> 
> By the look of the reaction from Beijing its well overdue.
> 
> Don't believe anything Chinese say.




If it's true then yes, but if the Chinese are printing fake news to make the Govt look resolute, then no.

The Chinese are experts at obscuration, deflection and disregarding truth and their press are no different.


----------



## PZ99 (7 December 2017)

We should sell Christmas Island to them for 2 trilion before they take it for nothing


----------



## sptrawler (7 December 2017)

Tisme said:


> Won't happen. You know and we all know why Malcolm is all tiresome talk and no substance:
> 
> Saw this on facebook:
> 
> ...




I must go back through the posts, to the point you and Rumpy were saying "if Turnbull was leading the LNP, you may consider voting for them".

Back then the Liberalites were saying, " Turnbull is a joke, why put him as leader again"?

Obviously Labor pulled off another 'blinder'. lol

Just put a bigger buffoon in charge, than your buffoon. lol


----------



## Tisme (8 December 2017)

sptrawler said:


> I must go back through the posts, to the point you and Rumpy were saying "if Turnbull was leading the LNP, you may consider voting for them".
> 
> Back then the Liberalites were saying, " Turnbull is a joke, why put him as leader again"?
> 
> ...





You won't find a post with considering a vote for Malcolm. In fact I have form in my long held conviction he is all pi55 and wind.  It just took Rumpole a little more time ...say  6 years or so


----------



## dutchie (8 December 2017)

Andrew Robb could be challenging our national security too.

Malcolm Turnbull and top cabinet ministers have been slapped with a stinging rebuke from a former senior colleague over their plan to target “covert” agents who work for foreign powers, amid a political storm over Chinese influence in national affairs.
Former trade minister Andrew Robb, who masterminded John Howard’s 1996 election victory, warned the Prime Minister and other members of the national security committee of federal cabinet against fuelling a “smear” against his name that suggests “treasonous” activity because he advises a Chinese company.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...a/news-story/b969f938f02b21165c6a22dcce6307a6


He needs to be very careful.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 December 2017)

Tisme said:


> You won't find a post with considering a vote for Malcolm. In fact I have form in my long held conviction he is all pi55 and wind.  It just took Rumpole a little more time ...say  6 years or so




If he had stuck to his guns over things like an ETS then I think I would have voted for him, but his performance has been weak kneed  and ineffectual, so yes I now concede that Tisme was right.

Voting Liberal would have been a tough choice for me at any time, but it's now out of the question.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 December 2017)

dutchie said:


> Andrew Robb could be challenging our national security too.
> 
> Malcolm Turnbull and top cabinet ministers have been slapped with a stinging rebuke from a former senior colleague over their plan to target “covert” agents who work for foreign powers, amid a political storm over Chinese influence in national affairs.
> Former trade minister Andrew Robb, who masterminded John Howard’s 1996 election victory, warned the Prime Minister and other members of the national security committee of federal cabinet against fuelling a “smear” against his name that suggests “treasonous” activity because he advises a Chinese company.
> ...




If Dastyari has to go from the Labor Party (and he should), then Robb should quit his job with Landbridge.

Having a former Cabinet Minister with a Cabinet security clearance in the grip of a Chinese company with strong connections to the Chinese government (don't they all) is a bigger threat  threat to national security than little Sam.


----------



## moXJO (8 December 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> If Dastyari has to go from the Labor Party (and he should), then Robb should quit his job with Landbridge.
> 
> Having a former Cabinet Minister with a Cabinet security clearance in the grip of a Chinese company with strong connections to the Chinese government (don't they all) is a bigger threat  threat to national security than little Sam.



No its not.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 December 2017)

moXJO said:


> No its not.




Why not ?


----------



## Tisme (8 December 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Why not ?





Given that the Chinese State owns all the businesses and actively asserts its political will on them is major cause for concern.

Does anyone remember the tenders for NBN rollout technology and who was barred from participating because of security concerns?


----------



## PZ99 (8 December 2017)

There is one difference. Unlike Andrew Robb, Dastaryi is still in parliament and privy to sensitive info so there is a trust / conflict of interest issue. 

Trouble with politics is mud sticks and Dastaryi is a liability with 2 not out. 

When you gotta go ya gotta go


----------



## Tisme (8 December 2017)

PZ99 said:


> There is one difference. Unlike Andrew Robb, Dastaryi is still in parliament and privy to sensitive info so there is a trust / conflict of interest issue.
> 
> Trouble with politics is mud sticks and Dastaryi is a liability with 2 not out.
> 
> When you gotta go ya gotta go





But he wasn't privy. That has already been established. He wasn't in the circle of trust and the govt knows it.


----------



## moXJO (8 December 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Why not ?



Robb has already been isolatated and just as much a sellout. Libs are generally US centric when it comes to factions.

Dastyari is backed by a powerful faction coupled with the fact that labor factions and unions support communist China.

 It doesn't stop just at Dastyari. Why do you think he is still there. I don't agree with downplaying his role as insignificant when it isn't.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 December 2017)

moXJO said:


> Why do you think he is still there.




He's still there because he can't be thrown out of Parliament. He could be thrown out of the Labor Party but he still gets to sit in the Senate.

Robb had access to sensitive security information as a Cabinet Minister. There is nothing to say that he won't say the wrong thing in a moment of weakness and there are people who will be recording everything he says.


----------



## Tisme (8 December 2017)

moXJO said:


> with the fact that labor factions and unions support communist China.
> 
> .




Can you elaborate and provide proofs of that? Unions are generally anti communist AFAIK, in no small part because labour unions are banned in China, aren't they?


----------



## SirRumpole (8 December 2017)

Tisme said:


> Does anyone remember the tenders for NBN rollout technology and who was barred from participating because of security concerns?




Yes and the new ASIO building that had to be ripped apart and rebuilt

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/securi...-asio-headquarters-stolen-20130527-2n7kz.html


----------



## moXJO (8 December 2017)

Tisme said:


> Can you elaborate and provide proofs of that? Unions are generally anti communist AFAIK, in no small part because labour unions are banned in China, aren't they?



No, actually I leave it at that.


----------



## dutchie (11 December 2017)

Good to see Malcolm acting on the attempted foreign (Chinese) influence on Australian sovereignty.

The more China complains the more obvious their ambitions become and that Malcolm is on the right track.

Go Malcolm!

Next, stop them from buying and/or controlling our agricultural land, ports, etc.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 December 2017)

Liberal primary vote collapses in Bennelong according to Newspoll, result on knife edge.

The implications for Turnbull if the Libs lose this seat are profound. If they do lose, I think Turnbull won't be PM at the next election.

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-...oll-result-shows-bennelong-on-knife-edge.html


----------



## Logique (12 December 2017)

Remember Turnbull the great friend of the Jewish community in Australia, and especially the seat of Wentworth?

The UN put up a motion condemning the US and Israel about the Jerusalem capital. Which passed solidly, about 157 to 8.

And Australia? We abstained. 

It's one thing in the safety of inner city Sydney, when you're fishing for electorate votes. But seemingly quite another on the floor of the UN. Gutless. And the US would have noticed too.


----------



## dutchie (12 December 2017)

Malcolm Turnbull admits he regrets calling for Tony Abbott to be overthrown as PM after 30 Newspoll losses - as support for the Liberals continues to collapse

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...alling-Abbott-overthrowing.html#ixzz50zeUVhAG 

Which means:
Now that *I'm* coming up to 30 Newspoll losses, I'm going to admit to making a mistake. But please don't do the same to me!


----------



## moXJO (12 December 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Liberal primary vote collapses in Bennelong according to Newspoll, result on knife edge.
> 
> The implications for Turnbull if the Libs lose this seat are profound. If they do lose, I think Turnbull won't be PM at the next election.
> 
> http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-...oll-result-shows-bennelong-on-knife-edge.html



Libs must really be on the nose for KK to even get a look in. They will need a massive rethink about their party position if they were to lose.
Polls don't mean much these days though.


----------



## sptrawler (14 December 2017)

The LNP lost the plot long ago, when they put Turnbull in, we said it was dumb then and it has proven dumber since.IMO
Even Shorten can get in now, which will prove a disaster for those on welfare, just hold your breath and watch what happens. IMO
14/12/17


----------



## PZ99 (15 December 2017)

Looks like John Alexander has scored himself a double fault 

John Alexander ‘failed to declare rental income’ on Moss Vale property

For the record, it's worth remembering that JA is an A-grade hater of penalty rates.
While I like the guy more than KK his policies make him unelectable for me.

This is why the LNP have lost the plot - they aren't there for the underdog.


----------



## Logique (15 December 2017)

Big day tomorrow, Saturday, the Bennelong by-election. It's been a 'bare-knuckle fight', as one pundit put it.

It's a conservative electorate, and although they're annoyed at the SSM Bill's non-amendment in parliament, I think Labor candidate KK would be a bridge too far for them.

The sitting member to squeak home on Bernardi party ACP preferences.


----------



## moXJO (15 December 2017)

Chinese and Korean vote might turn the tide for KK. Labor have targeted them with a massive amount of money.


----------



## moXJO (15 December 2017)

PZ99 said:


> This is why the LNP have lost the plot - they aren't there for the underdog.



I have to agree.
I think a lot of previous  lib voters would probably be amused if kk tears down the current government.


----------



## Tisme (15 December 2017)

PZ99 said:


> Looks like John Alexander has scored himself a double fault
> 
> John Alexander ‘failed to declare rental income’ on Moss Vale property
> 
> ...





Yeah but he wasn't a legit politician, so no foul.


----------



## Tisme (15 December 2017)

Logique said:


> Big day tomorrow, Saturday, the Bennelong by-election. It's been a 'bare-knuckle fight', as one pundit put it.
> 
> It's a conservative electorate, and although they're annoyed at the SSM Bill's non-amendment in parliament, I think Labor candidate KK would be a bridge too far for them.
> 
> The sitting member to squeak home on Bernardi party ACP preferences.





KK is a manufactured body who fits neatly the gender bias in favour of women these days. It could be argued Alexander is also cynical candidate based on public persona rather than political substance.

While candidates are selected on social identity and physical appearance rather than merit, I think we are doomed to have the second rate politicians we have to endure.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 December 2017)

Another reject to represent us overseas. Downer, Vanstone, Hockey and now Brandis , why does the LNP continue to embarrass us by posting their dirty laundry to our international friends ? 

Surely Russia or China would be more appropriate ? 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-...er-as-australias-uk-high-commissioner/9267482


----------



## sptrawler (18 December 2017)

The LNP win in Bennelong, just indicates how much the public dislike Shorten, Labor should have taken the seat. IMO


----------



## SirRumpole (21 December 2017)

Science dumped from Cabinet.

The area that is most likely to solve the world's problems is handed over to a nobody outside of Cabinet.

What a joke this government is, Turnbull is now taking revenge on Alan Finkel for daring to propose a renewable energy target.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-...er-malcolm-turnbull-cabinet-reshuffle/9277260


----------



## Logique (21 December 2017)

No this is good news. We don't need such a direct conduit for warmist anti-science, which was the hope of those now complaining about it. With their discredited garbage-in-garbage-out desktop models.

Electricity prices will go high enough in future decades.

I understand the new Minister is a sensible, rational person, thank goodness.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 December 2017)

Logique said:


> No this is good news. We don't need such a direct conduit for warmist anti-science, which was the hope of those now complaining about it. With their discredited garbage-in-garbage-out desktop models.
> 
> Electricity prices will go high enough in future decades.
> 
> I understand the new Minister is a sensible, rational person, thank goodness.




What an ignorant narrow minded attitude.

You think science is defined by one aspect of it ? Medicines and treatments that keep us healthy, radio communications that let us communicate, new battery and solar technology that deliver cheaper power, knowledge of the universe and how it works, new biotechnology that treats disease is nothing because of a belligerent opposition to climate change which has been validated all over the world. All this is now out of Turnbull's sight and mind and has been shuffled to someone with no background in the subject and who can just be ignored.

It's  disgustingly outrageous decision and one which will help advance this government's demise.


----------



## Logique (21 December 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> What an ignorant narrow minded attitude.
> You think science is defined by one aspect of it ? Medicines and treatments that keep us healthy, radio communications that let us communicate, new battery and solar technology that deliver cheaper power, knowledge of the universe and how it works, new biotechnology that treats disease is nothing because of a belligerent opposition to climate change which has been validated all over the world. All this is now out of Turnbull's sight and mind and has been shuffled to someone with no background in the subject and who can just be ignored.
> It's  disgustingly outrageous decision and one which will help advance this government's demise.



As if any of this needs a seat in Cabinet to be advanced!

A small group of climate scientists have decided to abandon the scientific method, and become activists. This demotion is down to them.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 December 2017)

Logique said:


> As if any of this needs a seat in Cabinet to be advanced!
> 
> A small group of climate scientists have decided to abandon the scientific method, and become activists. This demotion is down to them.




So, you admit it's a demotion. And the rest of science has to suffer for a perceived political slight by one part of it.

OK, I guess we know now that this government is so vindictive and arrogant that it's prepared to take revenge against all of science for the "sins" of a few.

This government is monumentally unfit to run this country.


----------



## wayneL (21 December 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> So, you admit it's a demotion. And the rest of science has to suffer for a perceived political slight by one part of it.
> 
> OK, I guess we know now that this government is so vindictive and arrogant that it's prepared to take revenge against all of science for the "sins" of a few.
> 
> This government is monumentally unfit to run this country.




True, but sadly Australians are going to jump from the frying pan,  into the fire


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 December 2017)

Logique said:


> Electricity prices will go high enough in future decades.



I won't derail this thread too much, there's a separate thread for energy, but I'll say this.

Renewables are one of the reasons power prices have increased.

Network costs, retail competition and a lack of planning are all much bigger costs that are being passed onto consumers however and each of these is either costing more than it should or is totally unnecessary in the first place.

None of the major parties is capable of fixing it given that any rational solution is at odds with the party's broader ideology. Labor would have the best chance from an ideological position but they're still quite some way away from what's needed.

Only way it'll be fixed in my view is as a result of a major crisis. Economic recession and a need to focus on making Australia more economically competitive would be one possible trigger. Major system failure affecting NSW and/or Vic would also probably do it. Financial failure or sudden withdrawal of a major player is another possible trigger. 

In the absence of such a trigger we'll muddle along much as we've been doing until something drastic happens.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 December 2017)

Smurf1976 said:


> Renewables are one of the reasons power prices have increased.




Anything new costs more originally untill the costs are spread out over the lifetime of the infrastructure.

Interesting to see that the cost of Snowy Hydro 2.0 is expected to be double that originally announced, and that is hardly new technology, but the point is why didn't they get the costing right in the first place ?


----------



## Tisme (22 December 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> So, you admit it's a demotion. And the rest of science has to suffer for a perceived political slight by one part of it.
> 
> OK, I guess we know now that this government is so vindictive and arrogant that it's prepared to take revenge against all of science for the "sins" of a few.
> 
> This government is monumentally unfit to run this country.




Wasn't it the same players who took to CSIRO a few years ago?


----------



## Tisme (22 December 2017)

Smurf1976 said:


> I won't derail this thread too much, there's a separate thread for energy, but I'll say this.
> 
> Renewables are one of the reasons power prices have increased.
> 
> .............




I would have heaped the major reasons as being : cash cow, private enterprise price gouging, oligopoly, govt revenue raising.

Who wouldn't put redundant infrastructure (e.g. poles and wires)  in place when you can sell it at three times the cost to the consumer block with no other choice


----------



## SirRumpole (22 December 2017)

Tisme said:


> Wasn't it the same players who took to CSIRO a few years ago?




The Wiki on Zed Seselja says he's an acolyte of Tony Abbott, so I think that indicates what his view on science is.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 December 2017)

Why job growth data are meaningless.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-22/wages-stall-as-population-soars/9281552


----------



## sptrawler (23 December 2017)

sptrawler said:


> The LNP win in Bennelong, just indicates how much the public dislike Shorten, Labor should have taken the seat. IMO




Obviously I wasn't the only one who thought Silly Billy, did more harm than good, in the Bennelong election result.
labor will be praying that the LNP keep Turnbull as leader, it is the only chance Bill has.

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/bill-...hope-is-slowly-deflating-20171221-h092oe.html


----------



## Tisme (29 December 2017)

Banana Republic anyone? I'm guessing Captain Tobias Wilcock will be front of the queue. Deskilling of Oz continues........

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...s/news-story/8c586a81982ab1cf4d0d767e5c3114fc



> Peter Dutton will allow foreign pilots into Australia on two-year work visas in an effort to fix a worsening national shortage that is already grounding planes and forcing flight cancellations.
> 
> But amid a global scramble to secure pilots, a slump in training and increasing foreign ownership of Australian training schools, Qantas pilots questioned the quality of those likely to be recruited to keep regional air routes operating.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tisme (2 January 2018)

Very impressive achievement by the govt in getting us into number one spot as worst manufacturing employment per capita. https://data.oecd.org/emp/employment-by-activity.htm


----------



## Tisme (4 January 2018)

Govt still factionally infighting , this time about carbon credits.


----------



## sptrawler (5 January 2018)

Turnbull obviously letting his ego run away with itself, decides to bring his personal favorite into play, the Australian Republic.
Where he can sit up there and swan it over the masses, what a dick.
At least Labor only want a Republic, so they don't have to answer to anyone, for stupid brain farts.
Malcolm may want to be el presidente, but IMO it is the last thing Australia needs, they are all useless.

https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2018/01/01/turnbull-postal-survey-republic/

Jeez Silly Billy, is even starting to look good, to me.
What a sad state of affairs, this will have to down as the most uninspiring era of Australian politics.
2007- 2018 just very sad Government.IMO
Non had a plan, non had a goal, non had vision and what do we have, nothing.
Actually we do have something, an absolute mess.
That is why our stock market has gone no where, because nobody has any confidence, there is no direction no commitment no vision for a future.
Just senseless rhetoric, about social obligation and reform, nothing about our economic structure and its transformation as manufacturing declines.


----------



## Logique (5 January 2018)

> Quote: sptrawler
> ....Actually we do have something, an absolute mess.
> That is why our stock market has gone no where, because nobody has any confidence, there is no direction no commitment no vision for a future...



Yes, and compare with the US Dow Jones, hitting new records weekly. We are in dire straights under Lib Party owner/proprietor Malcolm Turnbull. But one thing might save him. Utterly terrifying the prospect of a Bill/Tanya ALP government, and the Unions and the Greens running the country again. Taxation and electricity kWh bingo. And the borders, wide open again.


----------



## Tisme (5 January 2018)

Logique said:


> Yes, and compare with the US Dow Jones, hitting new records weekly. We are in dire straights under Lib Party owner/proprietor Malcolm Turnbull. But one thing might save him. Utterly terrifying the prospect of a Bill/Tanya ALP government, and the Unions and the Greens running the country again. Taxation and electricity kWh bingo. And the borders, wide open again.




Tanya and Wong are way more dangerous than anything the unions could dish out.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 January 2018)

The LNP's negative gearing lies...



*Government negative gearing claims contradicted by official advice, FOI reveals*



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-...s-contradicted-by-official-advice-foi/9309736


----------



## wayneL (8 January 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The LNP's negative gearing lies...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Any forecast on house prices and effect of policy thereon, is speculative opinion. 

...even (probably especially) if that opinion is "official "


----------



## moXJO (8 January 2018)

wayneL said:


> Any forecast on house prices and effect of policy thereon, is speculative opinion.
> 
> ...even (probably especially) if that opinion is "official "



Yeah I have to agree. Too many variables. Personally I'd jack rents to cover costs. So someone is going to wear it.

Labor is desperately looking for anything to smear the libs with after their bad run.


----------



## Tisme (8 January 2018)

moXJO said:


> Yeah I have to agree. Too many variables. Personally I'd jack rents to cover costs. So someone is going to wear it.
> 
> Labor is desperately looking for anything to smear the libs with after their bad run.




Seeing as most negative gearers appear to be public servants, my guess is that we would wear it in the form of increased govt salaries to offset the interest payments.

As I see it, the govt has to weigh the cost of public housing and the bureaucracy that is attached to it versus slum lords who only maintain buildings if they get public money to offset it with some profit added in.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 January 2018)

wayneL said:


> ...even (probably especially) if that opinion is "official "




I guess you would prefer to believe "research" paid for by the Liberal Party to their mates in the Real Estate Institute or IPA ?


----------



## Tisme (8 January 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I guess you would prefer to believe "research" paid for by the Liberal Party to their mates in the Real Estate Institute or IPA ?



http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/debate:-saul-eslake-and-sinclair-davidson/7403914


----------



## wayneL (8 January 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I guess you would prefer to believe "research" paid for by the Liberal Party to their mates in the Real Estate Institute or IPA ?



I believe I covered that Horace, by saying that ALL opinion is speculative.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 January 2018)

Tisme said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/debate:-saul-eslake-and-sinclair-davidson/7403914




Yea, the IPA is great on cutting spending on services but not cutting spending on rich landlords. 

What w@nkers that lot are.


----------



## luutzu (8 January 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Yea, the IPA is great on cutting spending on services but not cutting spending on rich landlords.
> 
> What w@nkers that lot are.




Well, since they take from the poor to give to the rich... it does not make sense to give to the poor since it was their money in the first place.

You can't take from people just to then give it back to them, can you? 

Negative Gearing is supposed to make more properties available for renting. Assume for a second that it does, somehow, eventually, create more inventory to be rented... Question is why in the heck is it better for people to rent rather than to buy their own home? 

Why not make policies where it level the playing field, give the battlers a chance to own a home of their own instead of these bs about creating landlords and that's somehow good for everyone. 

Not having a home will likely mean not having much to retire on. No equity to withdraw from in retirement. And forget about the kid/s' inheritance. 

Which mean, beside the unhappy kids, the average renters will eventually have to keep working 'til they croak (Costello's grand plan, and he's proud of it)... or the costs, and rent, for these eventual pensions will fall on the average taxpayers.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 January 2018)

luutzu said:


> Which mean, beside the unhappy kids, the average renters will eventually have to keep working 'til they croak (Costello's grand plan, and he's proud of it)... or the costs, and rent, for these eventual pensions will fall on the average taxpayers.




I think it's more likely that as they approach middle age they will become less attractive to employers and will find themselves jobless and out on the street, with the tab to be picked up by those who are still employed.


----------



## PZ99 (8 January 2018)

Negative gearing offsetting wages should be phased out and abolished. It was idiotic of the Hawke Govt and subsequent Govts to attempt to distort the laws of supply and demand with taxpayers money.


----------



## sptrawler (8 January 2018)

I think we are drifting into the "future of Australian property prices" thread, in the General Investment and Economics forum, this has been covered endlessly there.

Both Labor and LNP have had ample opportunity to address the issue, when in Government, neither have so neither can take the moral high ground.IMO


----------



## SirRumpole (9 January 2018)

sptrawler said:


> so neither can take the moral high ground.IMO




So what is the "moral high ground" in this issue ?

If it is to give more people a chance to own their own home by swinging the balance away from investors to owner -occupiers then it certainly isn't the LNP who are doing that.


----------



## sptrawler (9 January 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> So what is the "moral high ground" in this issue ?
> 
> If it is to give more people a chance to own their own home by swinging the balance away from investors to owner -occupiers then it certainly isn't the LNP who are doing that.




The LNP has been in office for four years, Labor were in office for eight years prior to that, if negative gearing was such a problem both parties have had ample opportunity to address it.

I personally have stated on numerous occassions, when debating this very same subject with Sydboy on the "future of Australian property prices", that negative gearing has an upward pressure on prices and should be wound back.
But at the same time both Parties have been reluctant to do so.
I guess it may be the fact, that we still have 400,000 people coming into the Country every year, and the Governments don't want to have to supply housing.

The other issue is, it isn't about giving people a chance to own there own home, it is more about they maybe can't afford to buy one in the centre of Sydney or Melbourne.
Well I probably couldn't either, so that's why I live where I do.


----------



## moXJO (9 January 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I guess it may be the fact, that we still have 400,000 people coming into the Country every year, and the Governments don't want to have to supply housing.
> 
> The other issue is, it isn't about giving people a chance to own there own home, it is more about they maybe can't afford to buy one in the centre of Sydney or Melbourne.
> Well I probably couldn't either, so that's why I live where I do.




Idiots generally skip over this bit.


----------



## PZ99 (9 January 2018)

The other bit that frequently gets skipped over in that debate is many people living in the centre of Sydney or Melbourne are doing it because that's where the employment is.

I sure as hell don't live in Sydney as a lifestyle choice.


----------



## boofhead (9 January 2018)

Labor had 6 years in office, not 8. The lower house has 3 year terms unlike the 4 years many states have.


----------



## Tisme (9 January 2018)

boofhead said:


> Labor had 6 years in office, not 8. The lower house has 3 year terms unlike the 4 years many states have.




Yes actually ~5.75 years. Net migration is less than 200k I think.


----------



## moXJO (9 January 2018)

Tisme said:


> Net migration is less than 200k I think.



Total increase of pop (inc births) was around 388k.


----------



## sptrawler (9 January 2018)

Tisme said:


> Yes actually ~5.75 years. Net migration is less than 200k I think.




I was adding a couple of hundred temporary migrants, that come every year, but that number does vary up and down.


----------



## sptrawler (9 January 2018)

boofhead said:


> Labor had 6 years in office, not 8. The lower house has 3 year terms unlike the 4 years many states have.




My appologies, you're correct, however the issue is still the same. Both parties have had the opportunity, to address negative gearing and neither of them have.

Now labor have said they will take it to the next election.
https://thewest.com.au/news/australia/alp-stands-firm-on-negative-gearing-ng-b88708097z
The issue is what they do, if and when they are elected, until then it is just rhetoric.
As was W.A's Labors rhetoric, when they said they would keep the price of electricity down, pre election.


----------



## drsmith (9 January 2018)

I remain of the broad view that the income tax base should be broadened to reduce effective marginal tax rates and to simplify. The problem with Labor is their motivation is to increase the tax take to increase spending. We saw during their previous time in office the wasteful fantasies they engaged in, some of which we are still dealing with the legacy of today.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 January 2018)

drsmith said:


> I remain of the broad view that the income tax base should be broadened to reduce effective marginal tax rates and to simplify. The problem with Labor is their motivation is to increase the tax take to increase spending. We saw during their previous time in office the wasteful fantasies they engaged in, some of which where still dealing with the legacy of today.




I think that we have been through this before Doc. The most wasteful government was Howard's who squandered money from asset sales and the mining boom on family tax benefits and upper / middle income tax lurks.


----------



## drsmith (9 January 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I think that we have been through this before Doc. The most wasteful government was Howard's who squandered money from asset sales and the mining boom on family tax benefits and upper / middle income tax lurks.



John Howard and Peter Costello knew Labor would otherwise waste it on their ideological fantasies which in any case they did with border protection being the prime example amongst the many we have indeed been through on the pages of this forum.

Cutting negative gearing and reducing the CGT discount in themselves are not tax reform. That, like increasing the GST rate in isolation are just tax increases.


----------



## Tisme (9 January 2018)

moXJO said:


> Total increase of pop (inc births) was around 388k.





I have a feeling the net figure is population growth.


----------



## Tisme (9 January 2018)

sptrawler said:


> My appologies, you're correct, however the issue is still the same. Both parties have had the opportunity, to address negative gearing and neither of them have.
> 
> Now labor have said they will take it to the next election.
> https://thewest.com.au/news/australia/alp-stands-firm-on-negative-gearing-ng-b88708097z
> ...




Not sure about that either. Didn't Labor project a July2017 timeframe at the last election?

Also it's not like the advice is new :

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-...s-governments-negative-gearing-claims/7521930


----------



## Tisme (9 January 2018)

drsmith said:


> I remain of the broad view that the income tax base should be broadened to reduce effective marginal tax rates and to simplify. The problem with Labor is their motivation is to increase the tax take to increase spending. We saw during their previous time in office the wasteful fantasies they engaged in, some of which we are still dealing with the legacy of today.




Didn't they hold it to the 23.7% that Howard left them?


----------



## Logique (10 January 2018)

drsmith said:


> I remain of the broad view that the income tax base should be broadened to reduce effective marginal tax rates and to simplify. The problem with Labor is their motivation is to increase the tax take to increase spending. We saw during their previous time in office the wasteful fantasies they engaged in, some of which we are still dealing with the legacy of today.



Although broadly in agreement with you Doc, if you mean hiking the rate of the consumption tax (GST), I think this unfairly disadvantages the lower socio-economic population, and undermines the progressivity of the tax system.  A GST is ok, but not if it becomes the path of least resistance for tax reform.


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2018)

moXJO said:


> Total increase of pop (inc births) was around 388k.




That is spot on, so population growth of over 1,000 people per day, someone has to supply the housing stock required.
I'm sure the Governments, aren't that fond of doing it.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 January 2018)

Is the banking Royal Commission a fraud ?

The public are not able to make submissions, yet.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-...on-still-offers-no-public-submissions/9325726


----------



## IFocus (13 January 2018)

drsmith said:


> I remain of the broad view that the income tax base should be broadened to reduce effective marginal tax rates and to simplify. The problem with Labor is their motivation is to increase the tax take to increase spending. We saw during their previous time in office the wasteful fantasies they engaged in, some of which we are still dealing with the legacy of today.





What!!! Spending has increased under LNP not to mention those two lucky mugs Howard / Costello election buying middle class spending.


----------



## Tisme (15 January 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Is the banking Royal Commission a fraud ?
> 
> The public are not able to make submissions, yet.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-...on-still-offers-no-public-submissions/9325726




P.S., Greens, ALP,  social pilots and Malcolm probably still coming down from the euphoria of the No1 national priority being solved ...SSM


----------



## drsmith (21 January 2018)

Logique said:


> Although broadly in agreement with you Doc, if you mean hiking the rate of the consumption tax (GST), I think this unfairly disadvantages the lower socio-economic population, and undermines the progressivity of the tax system.  A GST is ok, but not if it becomes the path of least resistance for tax reform.



I'm not in favour of hiking the GST rate, only broadening the base to make it simpler. If the base is broadened, the rate can be reduced to ensure the GST tax take is not increased or a broader approach could be taken with an increased GST take being used to replace other inefficient taxes.

It's fundamentally simpler to achieve tax progressivity through marginal income tax/welfare than through a consumption tax such as the GST.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 January 2018)

People are still waiting on hold for over an hour trying to contact Centrelink.

Surely someone could take a number and call them back ?  

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-23/centrelink-call-wait-times-balloon/9351450


----------



## Tisme (23 January 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> People are still waiting on hold for over an hour trying to contact Centrelink.
> 
> Surely someone could take a number and call them back ?
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-23/centrelink-call-wait-times-balloon/9351450




I have some insider knowledge of this. There is already increased call desk bodies in the "soon" pipeline.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 January 2018)

Tisme said:


> I have some insider knowledge of this. There is already increased call desk bodies in the "soon" pipeline.




Sub contractors in the Philippines ?


----------



## PZ99 (23 January 2018)

Drones with phones ?


----------



## Tisme (23 January 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Sub contractors in the Philippines ?




No bums on seats in Oz bricks and mortar.


----------



## HelloU (23 January 2018)

what is ssm?


----------



## Tisme (23 January 2018)

HelloU said:


> what is ssm?




Its the 21st century popular fad, similar to what yo-yos and Slinkys were in the sixties.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 January 2018)

Tisme said:


> No bums on seats in Oz bricks and mortar.




Good. It seems to make a nonsense of "sack all the public servants we can" policy and then find out that they can't deliver the services any more.

What a surprise.


----------



## Tisme (23 January 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Good. It seems to make a nonsense of "sack all the public servants we can" policy and then find out that they can't deliver the services any more.
> 
> What a surprise.




U-turns are the new iron fist governance of whatever it takes for votes.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 January 2018)

Abbott had plans to abolish welfare for under 30's.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-...-considered-welfare-ban-for-under-30s/9352888

That's why we have a safety net, to minimise crime...


----------



## SirRumpole (29 January 2018)

Why Free Trade Agreements are useless, to us anyway.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-29/why-the-tpp-was-revived-without-donald-trump/9368736


----------



## SirRumpole (30 January 2018)

The principle sounds good, no doubt there will be collateral damage.

*Catholics could be forced to register as agents of Vatican under foreign interference laws, bishops warn*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-...onsidered-foreign-agents-bishops-warn/9373222


----------



## PZ99 (1 February 2018)

ASIO officers have entered the Canberra and Brisbane offices of the ABC in an early morning operation to secure thousands of sensitive government cabinet documents.

http://www.news.com.au/national/pol...s/news-story/419c5ca2c98637b8fac2e0443458bf28

_“Not so much a cabinet leak as a leaked cabinet"_ Tony Abbott.

Good call. LOL


----------



## SirRumpole (1 February 2018)

Kevin Rudd to sue ABC over reporting related to the Cabinet papers.

He reckons the ABC accused him of ignoring safety risks, but he says he ignored financial and administrative risks.

Interesting. I see a humble apology from the ABC on the horizon.


----------



## Tisme (1 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Kevin Rudd to sue ABC over reporting related to the Cabinet papers.
> 
> He reckons the ABC accused him of ignoring safety risks, but he says he ignored financial and administrative risks.
> 
> Interesting. I see a humble apology from the ABC on the horizon.




He actually warned them of the context of the cabinet paper and they chose to ignore him. 

Kevin needs to join the Greens and then the ABC will probably give him a medal of valour.


----------



## PZ99 (1 February 2018)

I reckon Kevin will end up with more egg on his face than the ABC. Against safety advice from multiple departments and even the unions Kevin swung the Pink Batt and scored an own goal.


----------



## Tisme (1 February 2018)

PZ99 said:


> I reckon Kevin will end up with more egg on his face than the ABC. Against safety advice from multiple departments and even the unions Kevin swung the Pink Batt and scored an own goal.




The safety responsibility was that of the states, they are the ones that regulate trades. In QLD I had weekly pre-emptive safety office updates clearly stating the tools allowed, isolation and testing of power wiring, RCBO/RCD installation etc. The contractors are to blame for the deaths and fires, but politics being the nasty sh!te that it is, was foremost in the LNP/Murdoch stable.


----------



## PZ99 (1 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> The safety responsibility was that of the states, they are the ones that regulate trades. In QLD I had weekly pre-emptive safety office updates clearly stating the tools allowed, isolation and testing of power wiring, RCBO/RCD installation etc. The contractors are to blame for the deaths and fires, but politics being the nasty sh!te that it is, was foremost in the LNP/Murdoch stable.



That's all true but it doesn't remove the case when Kevin Rudd was warned prior to rolling out the program and leaving it to the market as opposed to regulation. A classic case of why deregulation is dangerous.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-...e-learnt-from-the-pink-batts-disaster/5466762

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...k=f504e21575ee496763a604050b547d39-1517459166

Even worse, they pulled the program after the contractors had stocked up on pink batts. Then the contractors had to be compensated by the taxpayers. As far as brain farts go - this was a doozy and it's akin to parents letting kids play with matches.

And Kev is saying he wasn't warned?


----------



## Tisme (1 February 2018)

PZ99 said:


> That's all true but it doesn't remove the case when Kevin Rudd was warned prior to rolling out the program and leaving it to the market as opposed to regulation. A classic case of why deregulation is dangerous.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-...e-learnt-from-the-pink-batts-disaster/5466762
> 
> ...




I think you have the timelines mixed up. 

I actually bundled the Safety Office notices sent to me and offered them to the commission of inquiry, but they had no interest . There was indeed govt regulation, but it was ignored by delinquent contractors who not only falsified inductions, used unapproved imported insulation, didn't employ licenced electrical contractors, but they also kitted their workers with inappropriate PPE, tools and fixings.


----------



## PZ99 (1 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> I think you have the timelines mixed up.
> 
> I actually bundled the Safety Office notices sent to me and offered them to the commission of inquiry, but they had no interest . There was indeed govt regulation, but it was ignored by delinquent contractors who not only falsified inductions, used unapproved imported insulation, didn't employ licenced electrical contractors, but they also kitted their workers with inappropriate PPE, tools and fixings.



That's been a widespread issue for 20+ years. Even late last year I discovered a mates' solar installation was made with unstriped wires attached to terminal boxes and an earth leakage to boot. No wonder the inverter went into islanding mode when the jug was activated. Crickey, it wouldn't surprise me if a solar powered house still fed residual power into a dead line even though it's illegal.

The point is all the above culpability was overlooked for the sake of a fast rollout.

_Next time you go to a Midnight Oil concert ask yourself why Peter Garrett has the "shakes" on stage whilst holding an unearthed microphone _


----------



## Logique (8 February 2018)

I'm sniffing a bit of partisan tit-for-tat going on.

Labor MP Susan Lamb, clearly a British citizen, shouldn't be in the chamber, sob story notwithstanding

Banaby Joyce, suddenly his current partner is pictured, none too flatteringly, on the front page.  It's not the first go they've had at Barnaby


----------



## SirRumpole (8 February 2018)

Logique said:


> Labor MP Susan Lamb, clearly a British citizen, shouldn't be in the chamber, sob story notwithstanding




I believe Susan Lamb's case relies on taking "reasonable steps" to renounce citizenship. 

She says she did this, but untill it has been ruled on by the High Court she is entitled to remain.


----------



## Logique (8 February 2018)

Yes you are right on this.  Referral to the High Court is the way forward


----------



## Tisme (8 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I believe Susan Lamb's case relies on taking "reasonable steps" to renounce citizenship.
> 
> She says she did this, but untill it has been ruled on by the High Court she is entitled to remain.




She has a letter form the UK govt saying they can't find any proof she is a UK citizen.  This is where she finds out here parents were spies for the Ruskies and her real name is Nikita


----------



## Knobby22 (8 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I believe Susan Lamb's case relies on taking "reasonable steps" to renounce citizenship.
> 
> She says she did this, but untill it has been ruled on by the High Court she is entitled to remain.



According to John Faine, in Queensland it is simple to get it, just sign a stat dec. Parent permission not required. She lies well. She should be a politi ... or yea, she is. Can fake tears also.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Kevin Rudd to sue ABC over reporting related to the Cabinet papers.
> 
> He reckons the ABC accused him of ignoring safety risks, but he says he ignored financial and administrative risks.
> 
> Interesting. I see a humble apology from the ABC on the horizon.





==================================================================
_*ABC apology to Kevin Rudd

 Updated about 2 hours ago

*
*Related Story:* Cabinet committee document warned about 'critical risks' of home insulation scheme

 *Map: * Australia
* 
On January 31, 2018, ABC News reported on a document prepared in April 2009 for the Strategic Priorities and Budget Committee (SPBC) warning of critical risks in the roll-out of the Energy Efficient Homes Package.

In reporting on that document, the ABC did not intend to suggest that Mr Rudd recklessly ignored critical risks of the home insulation scheme before the deaths of four young installers, or that he lied to the royal commission that examined those deaths.

The ABC accepts that, as found by the royal commission, Mr Rudd was not warned of, and was not aware of critical safety risks at the time.

The royal commission made no adverse findings against Mr Rudd and there is no suggestion that Mr Rudd lied to the commission.

The ABC unreservedly apologises to Mr Rudd for any harm or embarrassment caused."*_
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-08/abc-apology-to-kevin-rudd/9410836


----------



## Tisme (9 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> ==================================================================
> _*ABC apology to Kevin Rudd
> 
> Updated about 2 hours ago
> ...





There was once a time when you could count on the ABC just to report rather than make up fantasy yarns and retract them when the damage has been done.

Rumpole and I can pinpoint the date they changed into marxist mavericks... the day they started censoring our posts on the QANDA forum


----------



## explod (9 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> There was once a time when you could count on the ABC just to report rather than make up fantasy yarns and retract them when the damage has been done.
> 
> Rumpole and I can pinpoint the date they changed into marxist mavericks... the day they started censoring our posts on the QANDA forum



Agree, on the Liberal influenced change of CEO it immediately went fascist right wing, and so noticeable.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> There was once a time when you could count on the ABC just to report rather than make up fantasy yarns and retract them when the damage has been done.
> 
> Rumpole and I can pinpoint the date they changed into marxist mavericks... the day they started censoring our posts on the QANDA forum




They have recently brought back comments on news stories on ABC online. When I called Barnaby Joyce a goose I was nearly banned. 

Maybe I should have called him a randy bandicoot.


----------



## Tisme (9 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> They have recently brought back comments on news stories on ABC online. When I called Barnaby Joyce a goose I was nearly banned.
> 
> Maybe I should have called him a randy bandicoot.




Odd thing is I get likes from some of them, but in front of the camera they mouth different views.

There are many twats on twatter who like to send me poison pen responses to my posts. I can't figure out why they would be aggravated with my well researched and  factual contributions as opposed to the factoids they seem all too keen to consume as realistic.


----------



## sptrawler (10 February 2018)

It's a shame Abbott didn't take the same tack, I guess a lot will taken from Kev's lead.
One thing about him, he wasn't afraid to put it out there, sharp as a tac but a bit lost. IMO
He seemed to struggle between being the PM for the people, or the lead role in the PM's position.


----------



## Logique (10 February 2018)

Of course there are two sides to every story - but Barnaby, you are looking a complete goose at this point.

Almost Karl Stefanovic-like.  Lisa W. wasn't silly and jumped ship, but she'll find she's not the Queen Bee over there.

The SMH lady pages today (Julia Baird article), are saying double-standard, look at how Cheryl Kernot was treated back in the day.  Of course the background circumstances were very different, Kernot had resigned as Australian Democrats leader to contest and win a Labor seat.  Rather more significant to be 'sleeping-with-the-enemy' in such circumstances. 

I suppose it will all blow over, as it often does.


----------



## explod (10 February 2018)

Absolute disgrace:-

"Suzie Marston This man did everything he could( with help from Libs) to hinder and stop same sex marriage going ahead and all the while hes cheating on his wife and getting his girlfriend pregnant...great shining liar.

Beth Hill Revolting hypocritical piece of work. 
Waffling on about the sanctity of marriage blah blah blah. His wife and four daughters left to deal with the outcome of his dalliance. And a baby to a woman he doesn’t even acknowledge seriously. 
	

		
			
		

		
	






	

		
			
		

		
	
"  Discussion with fellow Greens today.

And its getting about the less priviledged:-

*"Australian Unemployed Workers' Union*
7 hrs · 


Barnaby Joyce is living rent-free with the mother of his unborn child in an Armidale townhouse owned by a multi-millionaire businessman who is an influential player in New England politics and was once accused of trying to bribe Tony Windsor.

The six-month gift of tenancy, worth about $14,000, was made by self-made local man Greg Maguire, who has had business interests in hotels, freight, and dairy and pastoral outfits, as well as a yacht charter enterprise.

The Weekend Australian also understands Mr Joyce’s new partner, former staffer Vikki Campion, was moved with the approval of Malcolm Turnbull’s office to a senior adviser position on senator Matt Canavan’s staff which delivered her a significant pay rise. The salary band for a senior adviser is up to $191,000 a year.

The move was approved after the relationship became the subject of rumour, prompting Bill Shorten to warn Mr Turnbull the public should be assured there was “nothing untoward”.

Mr Joyce was handed the keys to the three-bedroom, two-bathroom townhouse when he was removed from parliament after it was found he was a dual Australian-New Zealand citizen.

Rumours of a marital breakdown between Mr Joyce and his wife of 24 years, Natalie, were confirmed when the New England member returned to parliament and took up his role as Deputy Prime Minister late last year, but it was only this week that it was revealed Ms Campion was pregnant with his child.

The Prime Minister yesterday said he was “very conscious of the distress” suffered by Mrs Joyce and her four daughters. Mr Joyce moved out of the family home, near Tamworth in northeast NSW, before the New England by-election on December 2, later moving into the townhouse.

The Weekend Australian is not suggesting any wrongdoing on behalf of Mr Maguire or Mr Joyce.

Mr Maguire, who has been friends with Mr Joyce for many years, has a long history in New England politics. In 2004, his then friend and independent MP Tony Windsor accused Mr Maguire of attempting to bribe him. Mr Maguire, said to be acting as an intermediary for then Nationals leader John Anderson, told Mr Windsor he had become ineffective as an MP and should “back off” in place of a better candidate.

“Greg Maguire asked Tony Windsor what it would take for him to consider leaving politics and would he be interested in a diplomatic or trade posting overseas,” Mr Windsor’s campaign manager, Stephen Hall, told a Senate inquiry at the time. “Greg Maguire said that either could be arranged.”

The matter was referred to the Australian Federal Police, but the case was dropped on the advice of prosecutors who said there was insufficient evidence.

At the same Senate hearing in March 2005, Mr Maguire denied any wrongdoing.

Mr Maguire organised a fundraising dinner for Mr Joyce’s 2013 election bid that then opposition leader Tony Abbott attended.

Neither Mr Maguire nor any company he controls is listed as a donor to the Nationals’ federal division or its NSW branch in any year since the late 1990s. Neither Mr Maguire nor Mr Joyce could be reached for comment yesterday.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/…/48aa179f1e9a478a9f686639…"


----------



## sptrawler (11 February 2018)

I wonder if Barnaby will be done for rape?
It all sounds like the Lady had nothing to do with it, maybe she tripped and fell on his dick.
A marriage is about two people, both need something from the relationship, maybe only one was getting something from the relationship?
But that probably doesn't matter to to the partner that is happy with their lot. Lol


----------



## Tisme (11 February 2018)

explod said:


> The Weekend Australian also understands Mr Joyce’s new partner, former staffer Vikki Campion, was moved with the approval of Malcolm Turnbull’s office to a senior adviser position on senator Matt Canavan’s staff which delivered her a significant pay rise. The salary band for a senior adviser is up to $191,000 a year.
> 
> …"




I'm sure she was needed in Canavan's team. Not many people can do whatever talking head & paper shuffling things she does day in, day out ...merit based above all and irreplaceable.


----------



## Tisme (11 February 2018)

> The Prime Minister authorised the creation of a job for Mr Joyce’s now-pregnant girlfriend Vikki Campion in Senator Canavan’s office and also condoned her move to the office of Nationals Chief Whip Damian Drum.




https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/n...n/news-story/d767091db6c7891c65aa0cd7cd9c18ac


----------



## SirRumpole (11 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/n...n/news-story/d767091db6c7891c65aa0cd7cd9c18ac




_*"Voters deserve to know the character of their candidates because it gives an insight into how they will behave in office. If you can’t be faithful to your wife, you can’t be trusted to keep your promises in office, and you appear to lack judgment."*_

Nikki Savva on Insiders said Barnaby's career is over.

It won't happen overnight, but it will happen.


----------



## Tisme (11 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> _*"Voters deserve to know the character of their candidates because it gives an insight into how they will behave in office. If you can’t be faithful to your wife, you can’t be trusted to keep your promises in office, and you appear to lack judgment."*_
> 
> Nikki Savva on Insiders said Barnaby's career is over.
> 
> It won't happen overnight, but it will happen.




I had an employee who started his mid life crisis twenty years ago and it's only just starting to abate as the joys of fishing take charge.


----------



## moXJO (11 February 2018)

Nationals will implode if BJ gets the arse.


----------



## sptrawler (11 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> _*"Voters deserve to know the character of their candidates because it gives an insight into how they will behave in office. If you can’t be faithful to your wife, you can’t be trusted to keep your promises in office, and you appear to lack judgment."*_
> 
> Nikki Savva on Insiders said Barnaby's career is over.
> 
> It won't happen overnight, but it will happen.




That would have to be the funniest quote, I've heard in a long time.


----------



## drsmith (12 February 2018)

moXJO said:


> Nationals will implode if BJ gets the arse.



Barnaby Joyce appeals to his constituency but has always been an embarrassment to the major Coalition partner.

Warren Truss was far more bland as a character but I do wonder what the Libs would give to still have him as leader of the Nats.


----------



## Tisme (12 February 2018)

moXJO said:


> Nationals will implode if BJ gets the arse.




I hope he doesn't. I think this Lib/Lab spite fights are so b1tchy they are emasculating males.

My solution: toss all the first and second gen citizens who bring their old world ethnicity with them out of govt and let Australians who have a sense of Australian foundation pride take back parliament.


----------



## PZ99 (12 February 2018)

BJ will be the acting PM next week


----------



## SirRumpole (13 February 2018)

PZ99 said:


> BJ will be the acting PM next week




Or maybe not...


----------



## PZ99 (13 February 2018)

If he has Trump on side he's safe as houses


----------



## moXJO (13 February 2018)

It's funnier if he stays. I wonder if they will dig further on a certain leader of a party for allegedly being Mr Rapey Mcrape. 
Not sure if labor should be kicking off this kind of dirt war,  when its party has a lot of skeletons in the closet.


----------



## Junior (13 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> I hope he doesn't. I think this Lib/Lab spite fights are so b1tchy they are emasculating males.
> 
> My solution: toss all the first and second gen citizens who bring their old world ethnicity with them out of govt and let Australians who have a sense of Australian foundation pride take back parliament.




All politicians must have at least 100 years family history in Australia?  Disregarding about half the population....won't happen and nor should it.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 February 2018)

moXJO said:


> It's funnier if he stays. I wonder if they will dig further on a certain leader of a party for allegedly being Mr Rapey Mcrape.
> Not sure if labor should be kicking off this kind of dirt war,  when its party has a lot of skeletons in the closet.




It seems to be the media and Tony Windsor conducting the dirt war rather than Labor.


----------



## moXJO (13 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> It seems to be the media and Tony Windsor conducting the dirt war rather than Labor.



No its labor through proxy. They are doing their best to smear this year. After last years misfortunes.  Started with Lambs "I'm a poor widdle girl" deflection. Now the leaks to media will come thick and fast.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 February 2018)

moXJO said:


> No its labor through proxy. They are doing their best to smear this year. After last years misfortunes.  Started with Lambs "I'm a poor widdle girl" deflection. Now the leaks to media will come thick and fast.




Uncle Rupert's Daily Telegraph ran a story about an alleged incident involving Joyce at a party some years ago.

The Tele has little history of being a Labor  proxy. It could well be some of Joyce's rivals in the Nats leaking and trying to set him up.


----------



## Tisme (13 February 2018)

Junior said:


> All politicians must have at least 100 years family history in Australia?  Disregarding about half the population....won't happen and nor should it.





Not sure where the 100 years came from and not sure why you say  "nor should it".

Emperically (and I bet with regression analysis) it's the obvious cause for the rubbish parliament and leadership we have today = they have limited pioneer provenance, so they draw down on ingrained old world mantra, regardless if they wear speedos and have bbqs while dropping the f bomb every sentence.


----------



## Tisme (13 February 2018)

moXJO said:


> It's funnier if he stays. I wonder if they will dig further on a certain leader of a party for allegedly being Mr Rapey Mcrape.
> Not sure if labor should be kicking off this kind of dirt war,  when its party has a lot of skeletons in the closet.




Remember John Brown and Jan Murray using his office desk for hanky panky? LOL

remember Jan?


----------



## moXJO (13 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> Remember John Brown and Jan Murray using his office desk for hanky panky? LOL
> 
> remember Jan?




Lol
I'm sure Jans opinions pushed me further to the right.


----------



## moXJO (13 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Uncle Rupert's Daily Telegraph ran a story about an alleged incident involving Joyce at a party some years ago.
> 
> The Tele has little history of being a Labor  proxy. It could well be some of Joyce's rivals in the Nats leaking and trying to set him up.



Labor smear campaign. 
Do you really think that just as Malcolm was gaining traction,  that all of a sudden we get a labor golden play.


----------



## Junior (13 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> Not sure where the 100 years came from and not sure why you say  "nor should it".
> 
> Emperically (and I bet with regression analysis) it's the obvious cause for the rubbish parliament and leadership we have today = they have limited pioneer provenance, so they draw down on ingrained old world mantra, regardless if they wear speedos and have bbqs while dropping the f bomb every sentence.




100 years is roughly derived from your comment that we can't have 1st or 2nd gen aussies.....therefore they need to be at least 3rd generation = a long history in Australia.  I don't see the relevance.  Why not select the best person for the job?  

I don't understand what 'ingrained old world mantra' means and how this is a disadvantage.


----------



## Tisme (13 February 2018)

Junior said:


> 100 years is roughly derived from your comment that we can't have 1st or 2nd gen aussies.....therefore they need to be at least 3rd generation = a long history in Australia.  I don't see the relevance.  Why not select the best person for the job?
> 
> I don't understand what 'ingrained old world mantra' means and how this is a disadvantage.




It's a disadvantage because we have imported old world axes to grind , old world class and old world habits to grind that belong offshore where they originated and still prosper to this day.

I can't really gauge your ability to understand how Oz has changed over what period. Perhaps you don't know the lifestyle, free of thought police and full of brash that once was?

A third generation can be produced in ~40 years or even less. It's not magic pudding stuff, the education depts, for instance,  know that integration occurs on the 3rd.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 February 2018)

$400k for doing nothing. The life of an "embattled" public servant.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-...ce-affair-remains-shrouded-in-mystery/9434424


----------



## SirRumpole (13 February 2018)

Could this be the death knell for corporate tax cuts ?

And possibly for the Turnbull government.

*Tax-free billions: Australia's largest companies haven't paid corporate tax in 10 years*


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-...ian-companies-havent-paid-in-10-years/9423044


----------



## sptrawler (13 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Could this be the death knell for corporate tax cuts ?
> 
> And possibly for the Turnbull government.
> 
> ...




Interesting, the link doesn't work.


----------



## SirRumpole (13 February 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Interesting, the link doesn't work.




The article seems to have disappeared from the ABC web site.

Maybe they've been got at by Mathias Corman.


----------



## sptrawler (13 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The article seems to have disappeared from the ABC web site.
> 
> Maybe they've been got at by Mathias Corman.




Or they may be in manure for shooting from the hip, who knows?
But it is about time they made the tax system more transparent, rather than just using the plebs to top up, an obviously flawed system.
I haven't seen either side of politics, make a decent attempt, to make the corporate's accountable and pay reasonable tax.
Sure they provide jobs, but when it is at a cost to the payg taxpayer, it is still corporate welfare.
No different to Government subsidies, they are just subsidies by a different name.


----------



## luutzu (13 February 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Or they may be in manure for shooting from the hip, who knows?
> But it is about time they made the tax system more transparent, rather than just using the plebs to top up, an obviously flawed system.
> I haven't seen either side of politics, make a decent attempt, to make the corporate's accountable and pay reasonable tax.
> Sure they provide jobs, but when it is at a cost to the payg taxpayer, it is still corporate welfare.
> No different to Government subsidies, they are just subsidies by a different name.




Corporations don't actually provide jobs. It's the buyer/client that provide jobs.

Without demand there won't be any supply. Corporations can't and won't create jobs to supply stuff no-one wants, or no one can afford. 

So justificiations for the tax cuts to businesses and corporations are all bs. It's to take from the poor and hand over to the rich.


----------



## sptrawler (14 February 2018)

luutzu said:


> Corporations don't actually provide jobs. It's the buyer/client that provide jobs.
> 
> Without demand there won't be any supply. Corporations can't and won't create jobs to supply stuff no-one wants, or no one can afford.
> 
> So justificiations for the tax cuts to businesses and corporations are all bs. It's to take from the poor and hand over to the rich.




I understand what you are saying, but you nor I can supply iron ore to China, unless you can afford to buy a mining lease a big amount of machinery and a big offloading facility.

The only source of that amount of money, comes from companies, with a large balance sheets.
What I'm pi$$ed about is, we don't tax them by volume, adjusted to market conditions.
Instead we tax the working class, to facilitate their off take, of our resources in the name of job creation.
When in reality the companies are using their tax free profits, to further reduce their workforce, thereby reducing further our tax base.
It is just another case of us bending over backwards, in the hope the companies will treat us better, when in reality they won't.
The end result is blatantly obvious, and both sides of politics are in it up to their teeth, it isn't party specific. It is class specific. IMO

The really sad part is the media, being sold a bunny all the time, same sex marriage, sexual harassment, now Barnaby Joyce.
Anything other than the main game, our economy and how we are going to stop the slide into a third World economy.
That would take too much effort on the reporters part, and probably cause them to lose a career. LOL


----------



## PZ99 (14 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The article seems to have disappeared from the ABC web site.
> 
> Maybe they've been got at by Mathias Corman.



LOL. Took it down did they? But not quick enough 



Spoiler



Qantas CEO Alan Joyce, one of the most prominent supporters of the Turnbull Government's proposed big business tax cut, presides over a company that hasn't paid corporate tax for close to ten years.

The period roughly coincides with Mr Joyce's tenure at the helm of Australia's flag carrier.





* Photo:* Alan Joyce, the CEO of Qantas, is a major supporter of corporate tax cuts in Australia. (AAP: Joel Carrett) 


Despite generating income of $106.4 billion, the flying kangaroo has avoided paying tax on that bounty since 2009, thanks to Australia's generous tax concessions, depreciation provisions and the ability to offset company losses against past and future profits.

New analysis by the ABC reveals that Qantas is not alone — its tax behaviour is consistent with about 380 of Australia's largest companies. ATO corporate tax transparency data — confirmed in email exchanges with company representatives — reveals that about one in five of the country's biggest companies have paid no tax for at least the past three years.

*Total income and company tax paid in 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16*

*Total income and tax paid*

```
GOOGLE AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED  >>>>>>  1,298,266,767 (paid tax of 37,423,599)
APPLE PTY LTD >>>>>>>> 22,072,209,825 (paid tax of 338,270,281)
AMCOR LIMICPA AUSTRALIA LTD >>>>> 493,025,000 (paid tax of 1967)
BILLABOFAIRFAX MEDIA LIMITED >>>>>>> 4,580,513,275 (paid tax of 53,166,813)

Below companies paid NO tax

ADANI ABBOT POINT TERMINAL HOLDINGS PTY LTD >>>>>>> 970,055,950
ADECCO HOLDINGS PTY LTD >>>>>>>>> 1,506,053,631
ALINTA HOLDINGS >>>>>>>> 4,216,609,398
TED >>>>>>> 7,055,763,985
AMERICAN EXPRESS AUSTRALIA LIMITED >>>>>>> 2,783,800,000
ANSELL LIMITED >>>>>>> 971,946,789
APN NEWS & MEDIA LTD >>>>>>> 1,150,853,425
ATLASSIAN AUSTRALIA 1 PTY LTD >>>>>>>> 967,196,944
BABCOCK & BROWN INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD >>>>>> 1,722,376,955
BAE SYSTEMS AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS LIMITED >>>>> 4,080,795,842
BARCLAYS BANK PLC >>>>>> 1,435,935,548
NG INTERNATIONAL LTD >>>>>>>>> 1,775,841,709
BLUESCOPE STEEL LTD >>>>>>>> 14,549,521,747
BNP PARIBAS S.A >>>>>>>>> 9,319,136,945
BROADSPECTRUM LIMITED >>>>>>>> 8,616,335,336
CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND >>>>>>> 239,541,563
CSR LIMITED >>>>>>> 5,190,938,106
DIMENSION DATA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD >>>>>0 3,674,993,802
EMIRATES AIRLINE >>>>> 546,639,137
ENERGYAUSTRALIA HOLDINGS LIMITED >>>>> 23,901,332,940
ETIHAD AIRWAYS PJSC >>>>>>> 1,082,573,475
EXXONMOBIL AUSTRALIA PTY LTD >>>>>> 24,810,160,190
FOXTEL CABLE TELEVISION PTY LIMITED >>>>> 6,006,084,503
FOXTEL MANAGEMENT PTY LTD >>>>>>> 810,717,934
GLENCORE GRAIN HOLDINGS AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED >>>>>>>> 4,132,120,862
GLENCORE INVESTMENT PTY LIMITED >>>>>>> 27,929,635,183
GOLDMAN SACHS HOLDINGS ANZ PTY LIMITED >>>>> 1,844,322,093
GPT MANAGEMENT HOLDINGS LIMITED >>>>>>> 498,869,075
GROCON GROUP HOLDINGS PTY LTD >>>>>>> 1,275,925,113
HOCHTIEF AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS LIMITED >>>>> 718,078,437
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION >>>>> 2,160,011,920
LENDLEASE CORPORATION LIMITED >>>>>>> 24,388,062,555
MACKAY SUGAR LTD >>>>>>>> 1,373,222,981
MYOB GROUP LIMITED >>>>>>> 783,678,307
NEC AUSTRALIA PTY LTD >>>>>>> 1,221,261,407
NEWS AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS PTY LIMITED >>>>>> 8,532,558,083
QANTAS AIRWAYS LIMITED >>>>>>> 46,125,938,374
QATAR AIRWAYS (Q.C.S.C) >>>>>>>>> 1,159,924,321
ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND PLC (AUSTRALIA BRANCH) >>>>>> 1,384,940,790
STOCKLAND CORPORATION LTD >>>>> 4,568,483,833
THE BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP PTY LTD >>>>>> 398,014,708
TIGER AIRWAYS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD >>>>>>>> 1,349,159,787 A
TRANSURBAN HOLDINGS LIMITED >>>>>>>> 5,807,731,296
VIRGIN AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS LIMITED >>>>>>> 13,318,284,353
VODAFONE HUTCHISON AUSTRALIA PTY LTD >>>>>>> 11,831,941,032
```

*High-flyers land no tax*
Not one of Australia's biggest airlines has paid corporate tax since at least 2013 including *Virgin* and its subsidiary *Tigerair*, *Ethiad*, *Emirates* and *Qatar*.

Each one of those companies has sold billions of dollars worth of tickets in Australia.

When asked for an explanation, both Qantas and Virgin pointed the ABC to their historical losses and the entirely legitimate use of Australia's tax laws that allow them to offset those losses against future profits indefinitely.

Both companies were at pains to point out that, notwithstanding their zero corporate tax liabilities, they had continued to collect and pay departure taxes, fuel and alcohol excises, payroll tax, GST and FBT.

Presumably that's what the Ethiad spokesman was alluding to in his statement to the ABC.

"Ethiad is fully compliant with all Australian tax requirements, and has paid all the taxes it is obligated to do so under Australian law."

*EnergyAustralia's tax-free decade*
*No case for company tax cuts*



There is no compelling evidence that company tax cuts will result in higher wages for workers, writes Emma Alberici.


At a time when Australian households have seen their electricity prices soar, the country's leading energy retailer, *EnergyAustralia *hasn't been paying corporate tax. EnergyAustralia paid no corporate tax for the decade to 2016.

For the three years to June 2016, EnergyAustralia's 1.7 million electricity and gas customers across eastern Australia helped it record $24 billion worth of income on which no tax was paid.

An EnergyAustralia spokesperson said the company's performance "reflects how the power generation sector is underpinned by assets that were built last century".

"Since 2006, EnergyAustralia has written down the value of its assets by $1.9 billion."

*How much tax did the big banks pay?*
Ten years after the global financial crisis — which they are largely responsible for creating — some of the world's most prominent investment banks are collecting tidy sums of income in Australia and not paying corporate tax.

Among them is Malcolm Turnbull's old employer *Goldman Sachs*, which recently won a lucrative contract with the NSW Government.

Described by Rolling Stone Magazine as "the great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money", Goldman will be paid $16.5 million as the state's financial adviser on the sale of the $16.8 billion *WestConnex* motorway in NSW.

The investment bank generated revenue of $1.84 billion over three years but paid zero corporate tax.

Ditto for *JPMorgan Chase *which raked in $2.2 billion and hasn't paid corporate tax since at least 2013.

In one of the most audacious explanations advanced to the ABC for the non-payment of corporate tax, a spokesman for America's biggest bank said JPMorgan was still suffering the aftershocks of the financial crisis which meant that its Australian operations continued to operate at a loss.

But late last year, it emerged that JPMorgan Chase agreed to pay a record $13 billion fine to US federal and state authorities in 2013.

The purpose of this fine was to settle claims that it had misled investors in the years leading up to 2008.

Could the bank be writing that fine off against its Australian income? The spokesman didn't care to elaborate.

*Shifting profits overseas*



* Photo:* 88 per cent of people, polled by Reuters, think corporate tax avoidance leads to a culture which poses the question: "Can we get away with it?" (Supplied: Thomson Reuters) 


Curiously, French bank *BNP Paribas *also appears to have made some bad investments that taxpayers are having to compensate it for.

It hasn't paid corporate tax for at least three years – like Goldman, JPMorgan Chase, *American Express*, *Barclays Bank *and the *Royal Bank of Scotland*.

The oldest foreign bank in Australia (resident here since 1881) told the ABC that despite attracting close to $10 billion in income since 2013, BNP failed to make any profits.

BNP said its losses "included the write off of bad debts from lending to certain Australian domiciled companies".

As far as the local financial services sector goes, Babcock and Brown International stands out among the two-thousand company names in the Australian Taxation Office's public records.

*Babcock and Brown *remains the country's biggest corporate failure, having collapsed in 2009 with debts of more than $10 billion.

According to the ATO, Babcock and Brown International (a wholly owned subsidiary of the liquidated group, Babcock and Brown Ltd) reported $1.7 billion worth of income for the three years to 2016.

It paid no corporate tax.

CEO Michael Larkin, who has been with the Babcock group for 14 years, told the ABC that the money was taxed elsewhere in the world where Babcock and Brown International engages in business.

He wouldn't be drawn on what the company does overseas, where or how much tax has been paid in other jurisdictions.

Australian tax law has allowed foreign companies to shift profits to affiliates or parent groups offshore in the guise of payments for services.

They've also been entitled to lend money to their Australian operations at inflated prices to create excessive tax deductions in Australia.

This can all work to render the Australian business loss-making, therefore not required to pay corporate tax.

 Print Email  Facebook  Twitter  More
*Tax-free billions: Australia's largest companies haven't paid corporate tax in 10 years*
Exclusive by chief economics correspondent Emma Alberici
Posted about 9 hours ago




* Photo:* Hundreds of companies in Australia haven't paid corporate tax in the last decade, and are taxed less than most individuals. (Images Money / Flickr CC BY 2.0) 
*Related Story:* Look deeper: It's obvious why we won't have sugar tax 
*Related Story:* Why the tax avoidance exposed by the Paradise Papers matters
*Related Story:* Why not cut the corporate tax rate, few of them pay it anyway
*Related Story:* Which companies paid no tax last year?
 *Map: * Australia
Qantas CEO Alan Joyce, one of the most prominent supporters of the Turnbull Government's proposed big business tax cut, presides over a company that hasn't paid corporate tax for close to ten years.

The period roughly coincides with Mr Joyce's tenure at the helm of Australia's flag carrier.




* Photo:* Alan Joyce, the CEO of Qantas, is a major supporter of corporate tax cuts in Australia. (AAP: Joel Carrett) 


Despite generating income of $106.4 billion, the flying kangaroo has avoided paying tax on that bounty since 2009, thanks to Australia's generous tax concessions, depreciation provisions and the ability to offset company losses against past and future profits.

New analysis by the ABC reveals that Qantas is not alone — its tax behaviour is consistent with about 380 of Australia's largest companies. ATO corporate tax transparency data — confirmed in email exchanges with company representatives — reveals that about one in five of the country's biggest companies have paid no tax for at least the past three years.

*Embed:* Company tax chart 


*High-flyers land no tax*
Not one of Australia's biggest airlines has paid corporate tax since at least 2013 including *Virgin* and its subsidiary *Tigerair*, *Ethiad*, *Emirates* and *Qatar*.

Each one of those companies has sold billions of dollars worth of tickets in Australia.

When asked for an explanation, both Qantas and Virgin pointed the ABC to their historical losses and the entirely legitimate use of Australia's tax laws that allow them to offset those losses against future profits indefinitely.

Both companies were at pains to point out that, notwithstanding their zero corporate tax liabilities, they had continued to collect and pay departure taxes, fuel and alcohol excises, payroll tax, GST and FBT.

Presumably that's what the Ethiad spokesman was alluding to in his statement to the ABC.

"Ethiad is fully compliant with all Australian tax requirements, and has paid all the taxes it is obligated to do so under Australian law."

*EnergyAustralia's tax-free decade*
*No case for company tax cuts*



There is no compelling evidence that company tax cuts will result in higher wages for workers, writes Emma Alberici.


At a time when Australian households have seen their electricity prices soar, the country's leading energy retailer, *EnergyAustralia *hasn't been paying corporate tax. EnergyAustralia paid no corporate tax for the decade to 2016.

For the three years to June 2016, EnergyAustralia's 1.7 million electricity and gas customers across eastern Australia helped it record $24 billion worth of income on which no tax was paid.

An EnergyAustralia spokesperson said the company's performance "reflects how the power generation sector is underpinned by assets that were built last century".

"Since 2006, EnergyAustralia has written down the value of its assets by $1.9 billion."

*How much tax did the big banks pay?*
Ten years after the global financial crisis — which they are largely responsible for creating — some of the world's most prominent investment banks are collecting tidy sums of income in Australia and not paying corporate tax.

Among them is Malcolm Turnbull's old employer *Goldman Sachs*, which recently won a lucrative contract with the NSW Government.

Described by Rolling Stone Magazine as "the great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money", Goldman will be paid $16.5 million as the state's financial adviser on the sale of the $16.8 billion *WestConnex* motorway in NSW.

The investment bank generated revenue of $1.84 billion over three years but paid zero corporate tax.

*Embed:* Canada v Aust tax chart 


Ditto for *JPMorgan Chase *which raked in $2.2 billion and hasn't paid corporate tax since at least 2013.

In one of the most audacious explanations advanced to the ABC for the non-payment of corporate tax, a spokesman for America's biggest bank said JPMorgan was still suffering the aftershocks of the financial crisis which meant that its Australian operations continued to operate at a loss.

But late last year, it emerged that JPMorgan Chase agreed to pay a record $13 billion fine to US federal and state authorities in 2013.

The purpose of this fine was to settle claims that it had misled investors in the years leading up to 2008.

Could the bank be writing that fine off against its Australian income? The spokesman didn't care to elaborate.

*Shifting profits overseas*



* Photo:* 88 per cent of people, polled by Reuters, think corporate tax avoidance leads to a culture which poses the question: "Can we get away with it?" (Supplied: Thomson Reuters) 


Curiously, French bank *BNP Paribas *also appears to have made some bad investments that taxpayers are having to compensate it for.

It hasn't paid corporate tax for at least three years – like Goldman, JPMorgan Chase, *American Express*, *Barclays Bank *and the *Royal Bank of Scotland*.

The oldest foreign bank in Australia (resident here since 1881) told the ABC that despite attracting close to $10 billion in income since 2013, BNP failed to make any profits.

BNP said its losses "included the write off of bad debts from lending to certain Australian domiciled companies".

As far as the local financial services sector goes, Babcock and Brown International stands out among the two-thousand company names in the Australian Taxation Office's public records.

*Babcock and Brown *remains the country's biggest corporate failure, having collapsed in 2009 with debts of more than $10 billion.

According to the ATO, Babcock and Brown International (a wholly owned subsidiary of the liquidated group, Babcock and Brown Ltd) reported $1.7 billion worth of income for the three years to 2016.

It paid no corporate tax.

CEO Michael Larkin, who has been with the Babcock group for 14 years, told the ABC that the money was taxed elsewhere in the world where Babcock and Brown International engages in business.

He wouldn't be drawn on what the company does overseas, where or how much tax has been paid in other jurisdictions.

Australian tax law has allowed foreign companies to shift profits to affiliates or parent groups offshore in the guise of payments for services.

They've also been entitled to lend money to their Australian operations at inflated prices to create excessive tax deductions in Australia.

This can all work to render the Australian business loss-making, therefore not required to pay corporate tax.

*The transparency misnomer*
*Why tax avoidance matters*



It may be legal, but complex tax minimisation structures used by the wealthy end up costing the rest of us, writes Stephen Long.


For local companies, the dividend imputation system is a unique tool the allows businesses to pass tax credits on to their investors.

Australia and New Zealand are now the only two OECD countries to offer imputation which results in around a third of corporate tax revenue in Australia being handed back to investors.

Put simply, it means that a 30 per cent corporate tax rate with franked dividends raises roughly as much as a headline 20 per cent rate without them.

Over the past 30 years, a number of countries have abandoned dividend imputation including the UK, Germany, Finland, Norway Singapore and Malaysia.

Thanks to legislation passed in 2013, the Australian Tax Office now publishes an annual record of total income received, taxable income and tax payable for the roughly 2,000 Australian companies with annual turnovers of more than $100 million.

It's called The Corporate Tax Transparency Data which is somewhat of a misnomer given the numbers say nothing about how businesses use deductions and concessions to reduce their taxable incomes.

*News Corp pays no tax on $71m profit*



All the focus on the tax shenanigans of foreign technology and media companies has diverted our gaze from the tax paying habits of some of their home grown rivals.

The most obvious one is Rupert Murdoch's *News Corp* which hasn't paid corporate tax in Australia for at least four years.

The media colossus reported total income of $8.5 billion and even boasted a $71 million profit in 2014/15 but no corporate tax was paid.

The company's corporate affairs boss, Liz Deegan wrote to the ABC to clarify that: "News Corp Australia has deductible operating costs and certain tax incentives and allowable credits, like R&D and franking credits, that offset the revenue disclosed."

Its partly owned pay-TV company *Foxtel* received a $30 million gift from the Federal Government in the last budget ostensibly to provide better coverage of female sports.

In the three years prior, Foxtel had also not paid corporate tax. Fairfax, News Corp's newspaper rival in Australia, paid $53.1 million in corporate tax over the same period.

*The tax-free club*
Software giant *Atlassian* also pointed to R&D tax concessions when explaining why it too hasn't paid corporate tax for the past two years on accumulated income just shy of $1 billion.

A tally of the three years' available data reveals that some of this country's most recognised names haven't paid corporate tax since at least 2013.

They include *Broadspectrum* (formerly *Transfield Services*) which collected $8.6 billion in income over three years. An estimated 30 per cent of that income ($2.5 billion) was paid directly by the Federal Government for running Australia's offshore detention facilities. Broadspectrum was taken over by Spanish conglomerate Ferrovial in 2016.

Among the others who've escaped paying any corporate tax for three years are *Bluescope Steel*, *Ansell*, *Amcor*, *Billabong International *and *Transurban* *Holdings*.

The big property and construction companies *Lend Lease*, *Grocon*, *Stockland* and *GPT* are also part of the corporate tax free club.

*Mackay Sugar* and *CSR* who've been lobbying against a sugar tax haven't paid corporate tax for three years either.

*Not going down without a fight*
The Turnbull Government knows well that forensic tax audits are an expensive and resource sapping exercise, especially when they involve the complex interpretation of other countries' tax codes and their intersection with ours.

*The web of influence*



ABC News has mapped the flow of political donations to find out which industries are using their riches in a bid to buy influence.


Federal Treasurer Scott Morrison has committed $679 million over four years to a new Tax Avoidance Taskforce.

New laws to combat complicated corporate structures whose core purpose is to avoid tax have also been passed.

But if Australia wants the likes of Apple, Google and Facebook to pay more tax on the phones and advertising it sells in Australia, some of our biggest taxpayers, *BHP* and *Rio Tinto* should arguably be paying more tax in China where they sell most of their iron ore.

Amongst all the murky detail of corporate tax arrangements, one thing is clear — companies with the financial firepower of BHP and Rio Tinto aren't going to accept a negative assessment from the ATO without a fight.

Both of Australia's biggest miners are currently in dispute over their Singaporean marketing operations (corporate tax rate of 17 per cent).

Convoluted corporate arrangements see BHP and Rio sell commodities they've mined in Australia to their Singapore businesses which on-sell the iron ore et al in to export markets (predominantly China) often with a hefty mark up.

Former treasurer Wayne Swan has accused the miners of lying and labelled their marketing strategy "tax evasion".

The ATO rejects the legitimacy of the tax structure and is seeking $1 billion in tax, interest and penalties from BHP and about half that ($500 million) from Rio

A BHP spokesman told the ABC "the primary tax in dispute represents less than 2 per cent of the $66 billion in taxes and royalties paid in Australia over that 11 year period...BHP does not agree with the ATO's position.

"Consequently, we have objected to all the amended assessments and intend to continue to defend our position, including by initiating court action if necessary."

*Strange modelling to sell cuts*



Treasury uses assumptions divorced from reality to try and find the benefits from a company tax cut, writes Stephen Long.


Perhaps unsurprisingly, some of the country's most trusted corporate advisors including the Boston Consulting Group and MYOB paid no tax for the three years to 2016.

Even the industry groups — *Chartered Accountants (CAANZ) *and the *Certified Practising Accountants (CPA)* have paid nothing or next to nothing in corporate tax over the that period on account of their "mutual" status which excludes membership fees from assessable income.

CPA Australia reeled in $493 million in income between 2013 and 2016.

Australia's tax laws allowed them to pay just $1,967.00 in corporate tax.

Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand is a relatively new group.

In its two years as a registered entity for tax purposes it has paid zero corporate tax on $240 million in income.



A lot of work in that article - pity for it to go to waste. Emma Alberici - you owe me a beer


----------



## SirRumpole (14 February 2018)

Hey nice one PZ !

Did you have something to do with that report ?



ABC TV is reporting on the story this morning.


----------



## Tisme (14 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> $400k for doing nothing. The life of an "embattled" public servant.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-...ce-affair-remains-shrouded-in-mystery/9434424




Which suggests his pay packet far exceeds the value delivered .... if the organisation can get on without him, he has no worth to that organisation.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> Which suggests his pay packet far exceeds the value delivered .... if the organisation can get on without him, he has no worth to that organisation.




I have to agree.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Hey nice one PZ !
> 
> Did you have something to do with that report ?
> 
> ...





http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-...ian-companies-havent-paid-in-10-years/9443840


----------



## Logique (14 February 2018)

I don't think installing Barnaby Joyce as Acting PM is acceptable next week.

- Michael McCormack to Nats Leader
- Matthias Corman to Acting PM

It has to happen. Enough is enough.


----------



## Junior (14 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> It's a disadvantage because we have imported old world axes to grind , old world class and old world habits to grind that belong offshore where they originated and still prosper to this day.
> 
> I can't really gauge your ability to understand how Oz has changed over what period. Perhaps you don't know the lifestyle, free of thought police and full of brash that once was?
> 
> A third generation can be produced in ~40 years or even less. It's not magic pudding stuff, the education depts, for instance,  know that integration occurs on the 3rd.




I understand how Oz has changed.  However, unlike some here, I believe much of the change has been for the better.  I don't long to go back in time 50 years.  I don't think things were better then.

Today we have a much higher standard of living, are healthier and wealthier, opportunities are more widely available regardless of race or gender (I know you see this as a negative - I don't).  Crime is very low in this country, despite the fear campaign peddled by our media and politicians.

I agree that the 'extreme left' is being given too much of a voice.  However extreme views at the other end of the spectrum are also getting much louder.  Fortunately I think most in this country sit somewhere in the middle and can see through a lot of the bullsh!t.


----------



## Junior (14 February 2018)

Logique said:


> I don't think installing Barnaby Joyce as Acting PM is acceptable next week.
> 
> - Michael McCormack to Nats Leader
> - Matthias Corman to Acting PM
> ...




Agreed.  The guy continues to act in an unprofessional manner, the latest example being his half-arsed apology - cannot take responsibility for his own decisions and actions.  

Not appropriate to act as PM of this country.  Get him out of there.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 February 2018)

Junior said:


> Today we have a much higher standard of living, are healthier and wealthier, opportunities are more widely available regardless of race or gender (I know you see this as a negative - I don't). Crime is very low in this country, despite the fear campaign peddled by our media and politicians.




I agree that life is better today, but I live in a rural area which roughly approximates the urban area that I grew up in in terms of population density. I don't have to suffer traffic jams and noise, noisy neighbors and all the other aggravations of city life.

The worst thing about this country is that we have a bunch of politicians that couldn't organise a beer in a hotel. Petty bickering and short sightedness, hang on to power at all costs.

Reform of the political system is urgently needed, but will never happen because influence peddling is the life blood of all political parties.


----------



## Junior (14 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I agree that life is better today, but I live in a rural area which roughly approximates the urban area that I grew up in in terms of population density. I don't have to suffer traffic jams and noise, noisy neighbors and all the other aggravations of city life.
> 
> The worst thing about this country is that we have a bunch of politicians that couldn't organise a beer in a hotel. Petty bickering and short sightedness, hang on to power at all costs.
> 
> Reform of the political system is urgently needed, but will never happen because influence peddling is the life blood of all political parties.




You are right about politics....that is definitely one area which has gone backwards.

The big issue in my mind is rampant population growth in Melbourne & Sydney.  We are running short on electricity.  Water will be next (see Cape Town).

If I didn't have to work in the city I'd be evacuating to the country as well.


----------



## luutzu (14 February 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I understand what you are saying, but you nor I can supply iron ore to China, unless you can afford to buy a mining lease a big amount of machinery and a big offloading facility.
> 
> The only source of that amount of money, comes from companies, with a large balance sheets.
> What I'm pi$$ed about is, we don't tax them by volume, adjusted to market conditions.
> ...




I'm pretty sure that if you and I are given crap load of mineral rich acreages for next to nothing (with deferred payment)... we can manage to convince a few bankers and investors to chip in for the machinery. 

Yea, it's class warfare at the end isn't it. I mean, I don't see how politicians from either side could possibly understand what it's like to be that battling aussie. And that's assuming they're the nicer folks who would do something for their "master", what with being a servant and all, if they do understand the pain.

The Media... it's owned by corporate interests. When your bread and butter are useless ads from other corporations, you're not going to print stories that could in any way start a conversation.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 February 2018)

More analysis on corporate tax rates.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-14/company-tax-rate-cut-arguments-missing-evidence/9443874


----------



## Tisme (14 February 2018)

I'll just leave this to speak for itself 








Junior said:


> I understand how Oz has changed.  However, unlike some here, I believe much of the change has been for the better.  I don't long to go back in time 50 years.  I don't think things were better then.
> 
> Today we have a much higher standard of living, are healthier and wealthier, opportunities are more widely available regardless of race or gender (I know you see this as a negative - I don't).  Crime is very low in this country, despite the fear campaign peddled by our media and politicians.
> 
> I agree that the 'extreme left' is being given too much of a voice.  However extreme views at the other end of the spectrum are also getting much louder.  Fortunately I think most in this country sit somewhere in the middle and can see through a lot of the bullsh!t.




For sure we had a boring time of it back in the day, but the trade off for prosperity has been the frenetic pace of life and loss of leisure time. I'm sure there are arguments for and against, but my main beef is the undoing of the brief period in the 80's 90's when we felt like we were co-joined in the excitement of an enthusiasm for national pride and nation building. 

We seem to have developed into a kind of bastard child of the Victorian era when speaking your mind required stoic navigation through a puritanical maze of the what was acceptable conversation and opinion; which ultimately led to major social upheaval of class revolt.

We do seem to have a class system developing of those opposing the forced behaviours being thrust on us by policed legislated and shout down behavioural socialism. We are being judged almost every minute of the day.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 February 2018)

Barnaby admires phone.


----------



## PZ99 (14 February 2018)

Who's the frustrated dude next to him? 

Looks like the little doer _("tell 'em the price son!") _


----------



## Logique (14 February 2018)

For Nats Deputy Bridget McKenzie,
if you're not part of the solution, you may be part of the problem.


> 14 February 2018 - *Barnaby Joyce's 'phantom' deputy Bridget McKenzie missing in action  - *http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...kenzie-missing-in-action-20180213-p4z09s.html  - Typically, a deputy will be member of a party leader's praetorian guard; on the frontlines of the fight, doing everything they can to protect the boss.
> But Senator McKenzie - who took over the deputy's role just two months ago, replacing Fiona Nash after she was felled by her dual citizenship - has been *conspicuous in her absence*.  No TV, no radio, no interviews.
> Several journalists who have approached her in the Parliament House halls in recent days say *she has fled in the opposite direction*...


----------



## drsmith (14 February 2018)

Barnaby I expect will tough out Parliament this week then take leave with Julie Bishop as acting PM next week. He will then resign as leader of the Nats and hence Deputy PM in the near future. He's finished in that role. It's now only a question of time and when the day comes, the Libs will breathe a sigh of relief.


----------



## Tisme (14 February 2018)




----------



## SirRumpole (14 February 2018)

Tisme said:


>





There speaks a true patriot.


----------



## bellenuit (14 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> More analysis on corporate tax rates.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-14/company-tax-rate-cut-arguments-missing-evidence/9443874




Are the ABC saying companies should not be able to use carry forward losses against current year earnings and not be able to depreciate plant and equipment?


----------



## SirRumpole (14 February 2018)

The suggestion was that the carry forward of losses should not be indefinite.


----------



## bellenuit (14 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The suggestion was that the carry forward of losses should not be indefinite.




I can't see why not. There are only indefinite to the extent that they exceed each successive current years profit, but since companies aim to be profitable in the long run, carry forward losses will be expended at some time. Provided the deductions against profit each year are legitimate (and the ABC hasn't shown, at least in the case of QANTAS, that they are not legitimate), then there shouldn't be an issue.


----------



## SirRumpole (14 February 2018)

bellenuit said:


> I can't see why not. There are only indefinite to the extent that they exceed each successive current years profit, but since companies aim to be profitable in the long run, carry forward losses will be expended at some time. Provided the deductions against profit each year are legitimate (and the ABC hasn't shown, at least in the case of QANTAS, that they are not legitimate), then there shouldn't be an issue.




The issue is loss of government revenue.

Of course the deductions are legitimate under the law, the question is whether the law is appropriate.

Giving a company an indefinite tax holiday because of one bad year is pretty silly imo. 

Shareholders are there to take risks as well as taking profits.


----------



## luutzu (14 February 2018)

Tisme said:


>





Who's that commie going against "free trade"?


----------



## luutzu (14 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The issue is loss of government revenue.
> 
> Of course the deductions are legitimate under the law, the question is whether the law is appropriate.
> 
> ...




It's socialised risk and losses but privatised wealth. That's what you get when you have friends in high places.


----------



## PZ99 (14 February 2018)

It's a sticky wicket: removing the encouragement of business risk is akin to a reverse tariff and  economic loss whilst doing nothing is kicking the fiscal can down the road at the expense of those that can least afford it.


----------



## sptrawler (14 February 2018)

We criticise the Royal Commission into our Banks, because they appear to be shafting Australia, yet they do at least pay tax.
Interesting part of the ABC investigation posted below.

*How much tax did the big banks pay?*
_Ten years after the global financial crisis — which they are largely responsible for creating — some of the world's most prominent investment banks are collecting tidy sums of income in Australia and not paying corporate tax.

Among them is Malcolm Turnbull's old employer, *Goldman Sachs*, which recently won a lucrative contract with the NSW Government.

Described by Rolling Stone Magazine as, "the great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money", Goldman will be paid $16.5 million as the state's financial adviser on the sale of the $16.8 billion *WestConnex* motorway in NSW.

The investment bank generated revenue of $1.84 billion over three years but paid zero corporate tax.

Ditto for *JPMorgan Chase *which raked in $2.2 billion and hasn't paid corporate tax since at least 2013.

In one of the most audacious explanations advanced to the ABC for the non-payment of corporate tax, a spokesman for America's biggest bank said JPMorgan was still suffering the aftershocks of the financial crisis which meant its Australian operations continued to operate at a loss.

But late last year, it emerged JPMorgan Chase agreed to pay a record $13 billion fine to US federal and state authorities in 2013.

The purpose of this fine was to settle claims it had misled investors in the years leading up to 2008.

Could the bank be writing that fine off against its Australian income? The spokesman didn't care to elaborate.
_
*Shifting profits overseas*
_




	

		
			
		

		
	
PHOTO: 88 per cent of people, polled by Reuters, think corporate tax avoidance leads to a culture which poses the question: "Can we get away with it?"(Supplied: Thomson Reuters)


Curiously, French bank *BNP Paribas *also appeared to have made some bad investments taxpayers were having to compensate it for.

It hasn't paid corporate tax for at least three years – like Goldman, JPMorgan Chase, *American Express*, *Barclays Bank *and the *Royal Bank of Scotland*.

The oldest foreign bank in Australia (resident here since 1881) told the ABC that despite attracting close to $10 billion in income since 2013, BNP failed to make any profits.

BNP said its losses, "included the write off of bad debts from lending to certain Australian domiciled companies".

As far as the local financial services sector goes, Babcock and Brown International stands out among the 2,000 company names in the Australian Taxation Office's public records.

*Babcock and Brown *remains the country's biggest corporate failure, having collapsed in 2009 with debts of more than $10 billion.

According to the ATO, Babcock and Brown International (a wholly owned subsidiary of the liquidated group, Babcock and Brown Ltd) reported $1.7 billion worth of income for the three years to 2016.

It paid no corporate tax.

CEO Michael Larkin, who has been with the Babcock group for 14 years, told the ABC the money was taxed elsewhere in the world where Babcock and Brown International engages in business.

He wouldn't be drawn on what the company does overseas, where or how much tax has been paid in other jurisdictions.

Australian tax law has allowed foreign companies to shift profits to affiliates or parent groups offshore in the guise of payments for services.

They've also been entitled to lend money to their Australian operations at inflated prices to create excessive tax deductions in Australia.

This can all work to render the Australian business loss-making, therefore not required to pay corporate tax._

Funny that the productivity commission suggests Australia's big four banks, should be open for more foreign ownership, as though that has worked for us in the past.lol
I just hope the left wing loonies don't decide to make the Banks the next target, they are on a roll, and no one can say anything against them.


----------



## bellenuit (14 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The issue is loss of government revenue.




The government hasn't lost revenue. Tax is based on cumulative profits and if there are no cumulative profits, no tax is due. It's like saying that the government has lost revenue because if the tax rate was 5% higher, they would have made more tax revenue. But the tax rate is the tax rate. 



> Of course the deductions are legitimate under the law, the question is whether the law is appropriate.
> 
> Giving a company an indefinite tax holiday because of one bad year is pretty silly imo




The law is appropriate. Anything else would be grossly unfair.

If, over the life of a company, it makes no profit and all deductions were legitimate, why should the government feel they have missed out? During that time the company has employed people both directly and indirectly, provided a service that was presumably needed and possibly prevented an overseas company from extracting profits from Australia for providing a similar service.

Take a similar example. If a company providing a needed service makes a loss of $1M for each of the first 10 years of its existence but makes a profit of $1m for each of the next 10 years. The tax legislation as it exists says that no tax should be paid for each of those latter 10 years as all profit is covered by cumulative losses, so at the end of year 20, they have made a net profit of $0. But what is being suggested is that tax should have been paid on 1 or more of the profits of the last 10 years (depending on how long you want cumulative losses to be deductible). This would be grossly unfair. To make things easy, lets assume that this was a private company with just one owner and he/she had invested $20M up front. If no tax was deducted, owners equity at the end of the 20th year year would be $20M, what the owner invested. If tax was deducted in the latter 10 years, this would be reduced by the amount of tax paid. So he is being penalised for starting a company, employing people and providing a service.



> Shareholders are there to take risks as well as taking profits.




They do take risks. When the company makes a loss, the value of their equity in the company falls (all things being equal).

It's very much like saying that if gambling gains were taxable, then a punter should be taxed on his most recent winnings, rather than his net winnings. When the gambler has a losing streak, he (like the investor) loses money. If his luck turns and he makes back his losses so that he breaks even, you are suggesting that he should be taxed on some of the recent winnings, even if he made no money overall.

Such policies would stifle investment.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 February 2018)

bellenuit said:


> Such policies would stifle investment.




Such policies are in force in a lot of countries in the world. eg The US limits carry forwards or backwards to 3 years.


----------



## bellenuit (15 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Such policies are in force in a lot of countries in the world. eg The US limits carry forwards or backwards to 3 years.




Actually from what I am reading the US allows carrying losses backwards for 2 years or forward for 20 years.

https://www.accountingtools.com/articles/2017/5/15/the-net-operating-loss-carryback-and-carryforward


----------



## moXJO (15 February 2018)

luutzu said:


> Who's that commie going against "free trade"?



He is an agrarian socialist.
A lot of people don't realize lots of the country polies are


----------



## PZ99 (15 February 2018)

PZ99 said:


> BJ will be the acting PM next week
> 
> 
> SirRumpole said:
> ...



Aye you're right captain 

BARNABY Joyce has been dumped as Acting Prime Minister next week in a dramatic demonstration Malcolm Turnbull has doubts about his role as his deputy.

http://www.news.com.au/national/pol...n/news-story/52f13bc420440eb1372624f38a0fd207


----------



## Tisme (15 February 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Aye you're right captain
> 
> BARNABY Joyce has been dumped as Acting Prime Minister next week in a dramatic demonstration Malcolm Turnbull has doubts about his role as his deputy.




Prenatal paternity leave?


----------



## Tisme (15 February 2018)

apparently this is why Barnaby did the deed ... fricken Bill Shorten's fault again!!!!



> Labor
> Bill Shorten - had an extra-marital affair with cute blonde Chloe Bryce 10 years ago - and got Ms Bryce pregnant while both were still married.
> 
> Tony Burke - had an affair with office staffer Skye Laris while married to Cathy Bresnan with kids.
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (15 February 2018)

Barnaby made a"shocking error of judgement" says Turnbull.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-...fair-changes-to-ministerial-standards/9451792


----------



## Tisme (15 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Barnaby made a"shocking error of judgement" says Turnbull.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-...fair-changes-to-ministerial-standards/9451792





 So his solution is to interfere with personal relationships ... like back to pre seventies public service.  Women get the heave ho when they get married?


----------



## SirRumpole (15 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> So his solution is to interfere with personal relationships ... like back to pre seventies public service.  Women get the heave ho when they get married?





I guess the simple answer is if you want to have sex with someone, make sure he/she is not a staffer. 

Having an object of your desire around all the time can be distracting from the job you are paid to do.


----------



## PZ99 (15 February 2018)

Banning sex with staff isn't going to fix the problem of favouritism or corruption which is the real issue here.


----------



## Tisme (16 February 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Banning sex with staff isn't going to fix the problem of favouritism or corruption which is the real issue here.




Bonking ban on the people who are running the country. Are we running a kindergarten?


----------



## PZ99 (16 February 2018)

Confirms the one-eyed way the aristocrats look upon their perceived lesser class dunnit? It's OK to bonk someone of the same sex but if you touch the minions you are sent to the far queue.


----------



## Tisme (16 February 2018)




----------



## wayneL (16 February 2018)

Nero fiddles,  as Rome burns.


----------



## Tisme (16 February 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Confirms the one-eyed .




Blue is better, Green the best:

http://www.vintag.es/2013/01/nazi-magazine-for-women-ns-frauen-warte.html


----------



## Logique (16 February 2018)

Logique said:


> I don't think installing Barnaby Joyce as Acting PM is acceptable next week.
> - Matthias Corman to Acting PM
> - Michael McCormack to Nats Leader
> It has to happen. Enough is enough.



Halfway there. I rarely feel much sympathy for Malcolm Turnbull. But today I do.

To the Fed National Party members - you're not in Kansas anymore..

Hey Barnaby, where's all the water in the Murray-Darling system, the South Australians are feeling very thirsty!


----------



## SirRumpole (16 February 2018)

Logique said:


> Hey Barnaby, where's all the water in the Murray-Darling system, the South Australians are feeling very thirsty!




That's Barnaby's most serious failing.

The MDBC is being run for a few cotton growers in Northern NSW not for the benefit of all who need it.


----------



## bellenuit (17 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Could this be the death knell for corporate tax cuts ?
> 
> And possibly for the Turnbull government.
> 
> ...





*ABC corporate tax slant didn't meet 'editorial standards'*

http://www.afr.com/business/media-a...idnt-meet-editorial-standards-20180216-h0w89o

*ABC's big corporate tax reveal exposes its innumeracy*

http://www.afr.com/business/media-a...idnt-meet-editorial-standards-20180216-h0w89o


----------



## bellenuit (17 February 2018)

Then Emma Alberici retweets Bill Shorten's reference to her flawed report.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 February 2018)

bellenuit said:


> *ABC corporate tax slant didn't meet 'editorial standards'*
> 
> http://www.afr.com/business/media-a...idnt-meet-editorial-standards-20180216-h0w89o
> 
> ...




The ABC has to specify exactly what was wrong with the story, otherwise the public perception will be that they have been got at, despite the denials.


----------



## Smurf1976 (17 February 2018)

Water, power, house prices, wages, roads, trains, businesses struggling and on it goes.

I just wish these clowns would start governing for the good of the country rather than themselves.

There used to be fairly common calls to abolish state governments. Looking at it right now though most (all?) the states are at least getting something done whereas the same can’t be said for the federal government which has been borderline disfunctional for years now.


----------



## moXJO (17 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The ABC has to specify exactly what was wrong with the story, otherwise the public perception will be that they have been got at, despite the denials.



I could  fart a more accurate and in depth story then that hatchet job.


----------



## Tisme (18 February 2018)

ABC seem determined with the story:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-14/why-many-big-companies-dont-pay-corporate-tax/9443840


----------



## IFocus (18 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> ABC seem determined with the story:
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-14/why-many-big-companies-dont-pay-corporate-tax/9443840




None of this is new and the twice Walkley Award finalist Alberici  must be surprised at the political interference.
Given the absolute fascicle behavior of the LNP leadership nothing would surprise at the moment.  

Love it how tosser Abbott throws in a hand grenade.....just trying to help out his mate Turnbull.


----------



## moXJO (18 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> ABC seem determined with the story:
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-14/why-many-big-companies-dont-pay-corporate-tax/9443840



Wasn't Qantas losing money for a period of years. Are they using examples where companies had losses in those years?


----------



## Logique (18 February 2018)

From no less a source than _The Guardian_


> https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...alysis-after-complaints-from-malcolm-turnbull
> ...The *ABC* said *the Alberici analysis piece had been removed because it did not meet editorial standards* and further information and context had been added to the news story.
> “On 14 February 2018 ABC News Online published two stories on corporate tax rates – a news story examining why some Australian companies do not pay corporate tax and an analysis of proposed changes to company tax rates,” a spokeswoman said.
> “The analysis piece did not accord with our editorial standards for analysis content, and has been removed for further review.”   The ABC has denied there was any pressure from the government ...



I recall Emma Alberici running with the headline, many big Aussie companies are not paying tax!  Which at very least required the qualification, that many are carrying previous years capital losses


----------



## SirRumpole (18 February 2018)

Logique said:


> Which at very least required the qualification, that many are carrying previous years capital losses




That was made quite clear in the article had you read it.


----------



## Logique (18 February 2018)

I saw it live on ABC TV.  I don't recall any such qualification from Emma, which is the point here.


----------



## bellenuit (18 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> That was made quite clear in the article had you read it.




Yes but it seems obvious her intent wasn't to inform but to attack attempts to reduce the company tax rate (which btw I don't agree with, at least not as a priority). The headline (from your original post, not the revised one) implied that tax was not being paid, so a tax rate reduction is irrelevant. But that is truly rubbish as that is just a temporary situation for most companies currently paying no tax and will not be the case once they become profitable once again. QANTAS said that they expect to use up all their carry forward losses by next year.

The fact that Shorten tweeted the headline to attack the proposed tax cuts and Alberici then retweeted Shorten's tweet shows her intent with the article IMO.

Neither Shorten's tweet nor Alberici's retweet provided a link to the original article which they could have done if they wanted to add context.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 February 2018)

Logique said:


> I saw it live on ABC TV.  I don't recall any such qualification from Emma, which is the point here.




I also saw it on TV and I recall Emma saying that what the companies were doing were completely legal.

There should be a discussion on the appropriateness of indefinite carrying forwards of losses. Companies can borrow or issue shares to cover losses, the taxpayers don't have to contribute.


----------



## Logique (18 February 2018)

Cheers SR, noted.
Just introducing this article today, by John Hewson about Barnaby Joyce, link under, saying Barnaby cannot remain as Deputy PM







> 18 Feb 2018 - Joyce doesn't deserve to be deputy PM
> By: John Hewson:  http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-deserve-to-be-deputy-pm-20180217-p4z0p8.html
> *Barnaby has only ever been for Barnaby – in life and in politics*.
> He has allowed his Nationals team basically to run amok over the past couple of years, ignoring government policy and responsibilities to cabinet solidarity, and to government unity, speaking freely on many issues, and on many occasions, notionally “in the interests of the bush”... Barnaby simply cannot remain as Deputy Prime Minister, irrespective of the Coalition agreement. *He doesn’t deserve it on either merit or performance*. If this requires the renegotiation of that Coalition agreement,
> so be it ...


----------



## bellenuit (18 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> There should be a discussion on the appropriateness of indefinite carrying forwards of losses. Companies can borrow or issue shares to cover losses, the taxpayers don't have to contribute.




Nope. Borrowing or issuing shares do not cover losses. You are confusing losses with working capital.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 February 2018)

bellenuit said:


> Nope. Borrowing or issuing shares do not cover losses.




Business is a risk, and shareholders know it.


----------



## bellenuit (18 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Business is a risk, and shareholders know it.




Your model would mean the death knell of entrepreneurship. Nobody would start a business if losses cannot be carried forward (at least for a considerable number of years). A typical mining operation with limited life may incur losses for the first 10 - 15 years during the exploration and start up phase and only turn a profit in the last few years. If for example, the overall profitability of the mine is $1b over the life of the mine, a loss of $1.4b over the early years followed by a profit of $2.4b once production is in full swing, at a 30% tax rate and allowing losses to be brought forward, would mean 300m in tax and 700m in after tax profits over the life of the mine. Not allowing carried forward losses would mean tax of 720m and profit after tax of 280m over the life of the mine. An effective tax rate of 72% for the project. 

You seem to hold the belief that the government is entitled to tax on revenue, not just profit. That is simply unjust. A tax year is just a construct making it easy for accounting and taxation purposes. A business is a long term undertaking and the accounting year is just a means of determining profits and tax at regular intervals. 

Your proposal would create huge anomalies in taxation that are purely related to timing rather than fairness. One starts up a business and incurs huge start up costs in June say (training etc.), so they have a loss for that tax year. The following tax year the business is profitable. But if losses cannot be carried forward, then starting up the business in June would have a hugely different tax consequence to starting it in July, when the start up costs can be applied against that years revenue.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 February 2018)

bellenuit said:


> Your model would mean the death knell of entrepreneurship. Nobody would start a business if losses cannot be carried forward (at least for a considerable number of years).




I'm just saying that it should not be indefinite. Five years would be reasonable. If a company can't get into profit in 5 years then it's probably not viable anyway.


----------



## Smurf1976 (18 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I'm just saying that it should not be indefinite. Five years would be reasonable. If a company can't get into profit in 5 years then it's probably not viable anyway.



Personally I think there’s too much focus on the short term already.

If anyone breaks even on the renewable energy infrastructure we need is less than a decade then they’ve either taken massive shortcuts or they’ve received a handout. Same with a lot of  infrastructure - in some cases you’d be looking at a decade just to see any revenue and obviously a lot longer than that to be in profit.

That there’s so much focus on the short term is already a big problem from what I see. There aren’t many companies willing to take a 30 year view knowing that all the profit comes toward the end. If they couldn’t carry the loss forward then even fewer would be interested.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 February 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> If anyone breaks even on the renewable energy infrastructure we need is less than a decade then they’ve either taken massive shortcuts or they’ve received a handout. Same with a lot of infrastructure - in some cases you’d be looking at a decade just to see any revenue and obviously a lot longer than that to be in profit.




As far as infrastructure goes it's probably cheaper on the long term for governments to build it from borrowing then collect revenue in the long term rather than as you say giving handouts to corporations who will then avoid taxes as well to pay for their handsome profits.

It worked pretty well with the Snowy Mountains scheme.


----------



## Tisme (18 February 2018)

Newscorp would be fairly nasty on their inclusion:

https://thenewdaily.com.au/money/fi...ias-largest-companies-corporate-tax-10-years/


----------



## bellenuit (18 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I'm just saying that it should not be indefinite. Five years would be reasonable. If a company can't get into profit in 5 years then it's probably not viable anyway.




Space-X and Tesla to name some high profile companies weren't profitable within 5 years. Probably most mining companies and half of all start-ups.

I simply don't understand why you think companies that cumulatively haven't made a profit since starting up should pay a tax. It's not as if they are leeching on society. They are employing people who pay tax, they are buying goods and services from other companies which in turn keeps others employed. They are providing a needed service. Taxing them is unfair until they make a cumulative profit. The fact that some companies only allow 20 years or so of carried forward losses doesn't mean it is fair. It's just government insatiable desire to tax, whether fair or not fair.

If they never make a cumulative profit and go bankrupt, then the investors lose out. 

It is not the intention of companies to forever be unprofitable. They hope sometime to be cumulatively profitable and then they will pay tax. That is the sole purpose of entrepreneurship. They should be lauded not penalised.

The basic question is: why do you think it is right to penalise an enterprise that is doing the right thing for the country? The government isn't missing out on anything other than the mythical "lost revenue" which I explained before is the same as saying that because the tax rate is 30% and not 40%, the government is missing out on "lost revenue".


----------



## sptrawler (18 February 2018)

Space x and Tesla still arent profitable.


----------



## bellenuit (18 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> Newscorp would be fairly nasty on their inclusion:
> 
> https://thenewdaily.com.au/money/fi...ias-largest-companies-corporate-tax-10-years/




That seems to be basically the same article that was subsequently withdrawn by the ABC.

The problem with the table at the end is that a company, like an individual, doesn't pay tax on _Total Income_, it pays tax on _Taxable Income_, which is arrived at by subtracting allowable deductions from Total Income.

Unless they can prove fraud, one could equally say all those companies listed paid tax on their taxable income at the company tax rate of 30%.


----------



## luutzu (18 February 2018)

bellenuit said:


> Your model would mean the death knell of entrepreneurship. Nobody would start a business if losses cannot be carried forward (at least for a considerable number of years). A typical mining operation with limited life may incur losses for the first 10 - 15 years during the exploration and start up phase and only turn a profit in the last few years. If for example, the overall profitability of the mine is $1b over the life of the mine, a loss of $1.4b over the early years followed by a profit of $2.4b once production is in full swing, at a 30% tax rate and allowing losses to be brought forward, would mean 300m in tax and 700m in after tax profits over the life of the mine. Not allowing carried forward losses would mean tax of 720m and profit after tax of 280m over the life of the mine. An effective tax rate of 72% for the project.
> 
> You seem to hold the belief that the government is entitled to tax on revenue, not just profit. That is simply unjust. A tax year is just a construct making it easy for accounting and taxation purposes. A business is a long term undertaking and the accounting year is just a means of determining profits and tax at regular intervals.
> 
> Your proposal would create huge anomalies in taxation that are purely related to timing rather than fairness. One starts up a business and incurs huge start up costs in June say (training etc.), so they have a loss for that tax year. The following tax year the business is profitable. But if losses cannot be carried forward, then starting up the business in June would have a hugely different tax consequence to starting it in July, when the start up costs can be applied against that years revenue.




Your example wouldn't work out so well "if" the company became profitable but decided it's more tax efficient to, let say, buy another loss-making mine somewhere and make another loss, again.

It's these kind of "losses" that the likes of Murdoch build their empire and pay no taxes. When one subsidiary makes a profit, they simply buy one or two other companies that aren't making any profit, negate the gains with the loss, carry them forward and voila... job creator, entrepreneurship.

And for those companies that doesn't buy loss-making businesses, or doesn't overload their subsidiaries with debt and interest, they simply set up businesses in Ireland and other tropical paradise.


----------



## luutzu (18 February 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> Personally I think there’s too much focus on the short term already.
> 
> If anyone breaks even on the renewable energy infrastructure we need is less than a decade then they’ve either taken massive shortcuts or they’ve received a handout. Same with a lot of  infrastructure - in some cases you’d be looking at a decade just to see any revenue and obviously a lot longer than that to be in profit.
> 
> That there’s so much focus on the short term is already a big problem from what I see. There aren’t many companies willing to take a 30 year view knowing that all the profit comes toward the end. If they couldn’t carry the loss forward then even fewer would be interested.




Read some old-school economist saying that infrastructure aren't supposed to be profitable. When a country's infrastructure become profitable, the entire economy suffers.

That is, infrastructure like roads, rail, the internet, communication etc. etc. These are "the commons"... the cheaper they are, the more competitive the country's business and enterprises... the cheaper the goods and services that can be supplied to corporations, businesses and your average citizens.

Since infrastructures tend to be either monopolies or duopolies in nature, hedge funds and other entrepreneurs love it. Problem is... they got a good thing that most everyone need, so they can charge practically whatever they like, increasing it each and every year. 

Since not all roads and bridges are privatised, businesses and your average people wouldn't want to pay for expensive tolls, they then congest the "free" public ones - putting more pressure on gov't to fix and repair; more congestion etc., Then the private ones aren't getting much user so they have to jack up their prices. 

Read somewhere that certain private operators would have clauses in their contract where the gov't cannot build or improve existing roads that "compete" with the toll roads.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 February 2018)

bellenuit said:


> The basic question is: why do you think it is right to penalise an enterprise that is doing the right thing for the country?





Enterprises rarely do the right thing for the country. They operate for themselves. They will avoid as much tax as they can by shifting profits overseas or by other methods. Loopholes should be closed to avoid corporate tax avoidance.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 February 2018)

Another National redneck ?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-...-christensen-feel-lucky-greenie-punks/9459476


----------



## basilio (18 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Enterprises rarely do the right thing for the country. They operate for themselves. They will avoid as much tax as they can by shifting profits overseas or by other methods. Loopholes should be closed to avoid corporate tax avoidance.




The capacity of multinationals to shift profits overseas or create artificial financial arrangements to reduce the tax liability to zilch is destroying our tax base. The case brought by the ATO against Chevron is indicative of how Australias tax base is being destroyed  and the weight of taxation is put on PAYE employees and local smaller businesses.

https://theconversation.com/australia-is-missing-out-on-tax-revenue-from-gas-projects-62899
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-21/chevron-faces-massive-tax-bill-after-ato-court-victory/8460874
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...fice-cracks-down-on-profit-shifting-loopholes


----------



## bellenuit (18 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Enterprises rarely do the right thing for the country. They operate for themselves. They will avoid as much tax as they can by shifting profits overseas or by other methods. Loopholes should be closed to avoid corporate tax avoidance.




This and Basilio's post after it is going off topic. We are simply talking about why a company doing the right thing should be penalised.

The basic taxation principle in this regard is that a company should not be taxed for income purposes before it has recovered its costs. If it hasn't made a profit, it shouldn't be taxed. That is just basic fairness. Why you would want to deter entrepreneurship is beyond me.


----------



## Tisme (21 February 2018)




----------



## SirRumpole (21 February 2018)

Looks like Barnaby is pretty mixed up.

Don't use contraception like a good Catholic, but cheat on your wife like a bad Catholic.

I wonder if he's been to confession ?


----------



## SirRumpole (21 February 2018)

Why give tax cuts to business to destroy jobs with technology ?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-21/nab-robots-taking-over-white-collar-jobs/9465524


----------



## luutzu (21 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Why give tax cuts to business to destroy jobs with technology ?
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-21/nab-robots-taking-over-white-collar-jobs/9465524




You know it is, you give tax cuts and hope for the best.


----------



## Tisme (21 February 2018)

Be interesting to see if Wesfarmer's 87% drop in profit is used as reason for corporate tax cuts or if the govt sees it as a portend to a smaller tax purse over the next twelve months.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 February 2018)

Tisme said:


> Be interesting to see if Wesfarmer's 87% drop in profit is used as reason for corporate tax cuts or if the govt sees it as a portend to a smaller tax purse over the next twelve months.




With my limited accountancy experience, this loss was the result mainly of a one off capital loss (Bunnings UK) written down against profits ?

Another tax dodge in my view.


----------



## basilio (21 February 2018)

Latest news on Barnaby Joyce.  Will be interesting to see how it impacts of public perception of the Turnball government.

* PM Regretfully Confirms Barnaby Joyce Has Taken Leave To Appear On I’m A Celebrity! *
        





*ERROL PARKER* | _Editor-at-large_ | Contact

Just when it seemed things couldn’t get any worse for Malcolm Turnbull, they have.

This morning, the Prime Minister was forced to address rumours that his deputy Barnaby Joyce had taken leave not to hide from the spotlight of public outrage – but to appear on Network Ten’s cornerstone programme, _I’m A Celebrity! Get Me Out Of Here!_

Turnbull spoke to waiting journalists today at the Lower House entrance in Canberra around 10 am this morning.

“At this time, I can confirm that Barnaby Joyce, the Deputy Prime Minister and Leader of The Nationals, has taken leave from parliament to star on that ‘I’m A Celebrity’ show on Channel Ten,” he said.

“It’s disappointing that this has happened, I had no control over it. It’s a National Party initiative to repair his image and rebrand Mr Joyce as a knock-about bloke who’s been judged too harshly for his many, many trespasses,”

“That’s all I’m prepared to say at this time, thank you.”

http://www.betootaadvocate.com/ente...arnaby-joyce-taken-leave-appear-im-celebrity/


----------



## basilio (21 February 2018)

bellenuit said:


> This and Basilio's post after it is going off topic. We are simply talking about why a company doing the right thing should be penalised.
> 
> The basic taxation principle in this regard is that a company should not be taxed for income purposes before it has recovered its costs. If it hasn't made a profit, it shouldn't be taxed. That is just basic fairness. Why you would want to deter entrepreneurship is beyond me.




The principle of a company being able to offset income against costs is sound. The practice outlined in the Chevron case illustrates how  creative accounting practices can subvert national tax policies by creating artifical losses.
In Chevrons case they "borrowed" hundreds of millions of dollars from a parent company at high interest rates for development purposes which produced  the produced enourmous tax lossess.

Just a clever rort. In no way legitimate losses.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-...o-target-offshore-related-party-loans/8532196


----------



## SirRumpole (22 February 2018)

Alberici's revised article on corporate taxcuts.

Arguments on facts please, not alleged bias.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-22/more-to-jobs-and-growth-than-a-corporate-tax-cut/9471856


----------



## SirRumpole (22 February 2018)

Formal complaint of sexual harassment made against Barnaby Joyce.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-...allegation-made-against-barnaby-joyce/9475694


----------



## Tisme (23 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Alberici's revised article on corporate taxcuts.
> 
> Arguments on facts please, not alleged bias.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-22/more-to-jobs-and-growth-than-a-corporate-tax-cut/9471856




Can't accelerate jobs and growth without increasing production and productivity.

Apart from a brief period in the Hawke/Keating years,  Australian business has a track record of an unwillingness to tool up and create industry ... a cultural cringe that we can't compete, instead an obsession a year on year desire for safe profit; unlike the U$ofA and Asian visions of long term commitment to asset growth.

We sold off all the public utility value created by the economic revolution of the 80/90s because of an LNP fixating belief in the prudential balancing of the books and out of shear luck our mines offset the inevitable stagnation and empty pockets that would have occurred otherwise.

I can well remember when Whitlam went to China and set up economic seeds, Hawke and Keating touted Asia and Howard subsequently touted USA, but couldn't undo the Asian ties. Now we are off to the USA again!


----------



## SirRumpole (23 February 2018)

Barnaby resigns as National leader.

Was only a matter of time.


----------



## PZ99 (23 February 2018)

Bye Bye Barnaby!

_Sorry, can't use the word toodaloo this time... PC and all that caper..._


----------



## SirRumpole (23 February 2018)

PZ99 said:


> View attachment 86369
> 
> Bye Bye Barnaby!
> 
> _Sorry, can't use the word toodaloo this time... PC and all that caper..._




Tony Windsor may let a smile permeate across his face.


----------



## Logique (23 February 2018)

The WA Nats division cancelled support for Barnaby. Then a harassment case involving a WA staffer was brought to light. Not that WA has any Nats members in Fed parliament.

I believe 'The Loyal Deputy' is, purely coincidentally, from WA.

But in the final analysis, Barnaby has nobody else to blame but himself.


----------



## moXJO (24 February 2018)

Logique said:


> But in the final analysis, Barnaby has nobody else to blame but himself.



Yep, should have kept little Barnaby locked in the paddock.


----------



## dutchie (24 February 2018)

I assume Turnbull is ready to resign when he hits 30 negative Newspolls (he's at 27 at moment).


----------



## moXJO (24 February 2018)

dutchie said:


> I assume Turnbull is ready to resign when he hits 30 negative Newspolls (he's at 27 at moment).



Is that a record?


----------



## dutchie (24 February 2018)

moXJO said:


> Is that a record?




Don't know if it's a record or not but it's the excuse Turnbull used for stabbing Abbott in the back and getting rid of him.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 February 2018)

dutchie said:


> Don't know if it's a record or not but it's the excuse Turnbull used for stabbing Abbott in the back and getting rid of him.




Lets face it, the LNP government is past its use by date. They only just squeaked in last time, and their only policy is corporate tax cuts which doesn't pass the pub test.

If they keep going along these lines then they are finished.


----------



## dutchie (24 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Lets face it, the LNP government is past its use by date. They only just squeaked in last time, and their only policy is corporate tax cuts which doesn't pass the pub test.
> 
> If they keep going along these lines then they are finished.




Unfortunately, I think your right. They are a pissweak Party and Government.
Unfortunately, for Australia, Labor is worse.


----------



## Logique (25 February 2018)

Logique said:


> ...
> - Michael McCormack to Nats Leader
> - Matthias Corman to Acting PM
> ...



Watch this space. Nats party room meeting tomorrow morning


----------



## SirRumpole (25 February 2018)

What is a free trade agreement worth ?

Not much if the US can increase tarriffs on our exports to the US.

http://www.afr.com/news/politics/ma...to-honour-steel-tariff-pledge-20180222-h0wiyj


----------



## explod (25 February 2018)

No substance anymore, just camera shots for electioneering.

Say jobs and growth a hundred times and have a good time.


----------



## Tisme (25 February 2018)

Logique said:


> Watch this space. Nats party room meeting tomorrow morning




As soon as Michael McCormack lands the job, the Greens and their SJWs will put on their indignation and outrage uniforms to out him for not only being a congenital white male hetero, but for being an obviously rabid homophobe because he had the audacity to link AIDS to gays who were "unfortunately here".


----------



## wayneL (25 February 2018)

explod said:


> No substance anymore, just camera shots for electioneering.
> 
> Say jobs and growth a hundred times and have a good time.



It could be worse. 

Could be accusing good men of being war criminals.


----------



## explod (25 February 2018)

wayneL said:


> It could be worse.
> 
> Could be accusing good men of being war criminals.



Like Billy Graham, RIP yesterday at 99, a man of God and encouraged the US participation in the aggressive Vietnam war.


----------



## wayneL (25 February 2018)

explod said:


> Like Billy Graham, RIP yesterday at 99, a man of God and encouraged the US participation in the aggressive Vietnam war.



What's that got to do with Bandt's and Di Natali's recent decent into the sewer of dishonour?


----------



## explod (25 February 2018)

wayneL said:


> What's that got to do with Bandt's and Di Natali's recent decent into the sewer of dishonour?



Th


wayneL said:


> What's that got to do with Bandt's and Di Natali's recent decent into the sewer of dishonour?



Not aware, you'll need to provide evidence/link as I know these two as honest politicians unencumbered by corporate interests


----------



## Smurf1976 (25 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Lets face it, the LNP government is past its use by date. They only just squeaked in last time, and their only policy is corporate tax cuts which doesn't pass the pub test.
> 
> If they keep going along these lines then they are finished.



Agreed.

I’m not overly impressed with Labor at the moment but the way things are going they’ll win the next election for no reason other than not being the Coalition.


----------



## sptrawler (26 February 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Lets face it, the LNP government is past its use by date. They only just squeaked in last time, and their only policy is corporate tax cuts which doesn't pass the pub test.
> 
> If they keep going along these lines then they are finished.




I did say, quite a while back, that silly Billy will be the Steven Bradbury of Australian politics.
The LNP won the unlosable election, in September 2013 and have slid off the back of the platform ever since.
Malcolm should move on, to running a CWA committee, he is better suited for that role. IMO


----------



## PZ99 (26 February 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I did say, quite a while back, that silly Billy will be the Steven Bradbury of Australian politics.
> The LNP won the unlosable election, in September 2013 and have slid off the back of the platform ever since.
> Malcolm should move on, to running a CWA committee, he is better suited for that role. IMO



Correction: It's Steven Bradbury OAM


----------



## Tisme (26 February 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Malcolm should move on, to running a CWA committee, he is better suited for that role. IMO




It would certainly be a lot easier for Lucy..... trying to handle her own job and running the LNP has to be a hard gig.


----------



## Smurf1976 (26 February 2018)

sptrawler said:


> The LNP



There it is again, “the LNP”.

In the past it was always “Liberal” or “the Coalition” until things started to go to crap and they came up with this “LNP” term which seems to have been widely adopted.

I can only assume it’s done in the hope that people confuse it with another party which has long uses a 3 letter acronym, that being the ALP.

Seriously, read any news report from the past and it’s clear these guys have tried a rebranding. I guess the realised that most have worked out that the Liberals are actually conservatives and that the Coalition is rather one sided anyway so needed a new term.

I just wish they’d get on with governing the country for the benefit of the population with less attention paid to the likes of gambling monopolists and their ilk.


----------



## wayneL (26 February 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> There it is again, “the LNP”.
> 
> In the past it was always “Liberal” or “the Coalition” until things started to go to crap and they came up with this “LNP” term which seems to have been widely adopted.
> 
> ...



The Liberals are conservatives? 

Not for a long time they haven't been.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 February 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> There it is again, “the LNP”.
> 
> In the past it was always “Liberal” or “the Coalition” until things started to go to crap and they came up with this “LNP” term which seems to have been widely adopted.




There is no such thing as the LNP except in Queensland, but it's just easier to write LNP than writing Liberal National parties or Coalition.


----------



## moXJO (26 February 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> There it is again, “the LNP”.
> 
> In the past it was always “Liberal” or “the Coalition” until things started to go to crap and they came up with this “LNP” term which seems to have been widely adopted.
> 
> ...



Hows labor looking in Tas state Smurf? 
I heard they were running on a no pokie machine platform with a Jacinda cookiecutter template.
Apparently narrowed the gap?


----------



## Smurf1976 (26 February 2018)

moXJO said:


> Hows labor looking in Tas state Smurf?




Putting aside my own views so trying to make a “neutral” comment, the way it seems to be going is:

*People see pokies as a definite problem and dislike the legislated monopoly given to one operator but it’s not a “top tier” issue so far as voting is concerned for most.

*The Liberal campaign has left Labor for dead. Regardless of their own preference or interest / lack of interest in politics just about everyone is talking about a certain Liberal TV advertisement. That ad would be the most common conversation topic in the state at the moment surely.

*Labor is clearly the underdog, even the party itself has said as much.

*Notable that house prices are seen as a problem. I say that noting that $400K still buys a decent house in Hobart but people are starting to see that as too high and something that needs to be addressed. If that’s happening down here then I can only wonder what’s going through the minds of people in Sydney or Melbourne where even double that price doesn’t get you anything much.

*Health is a key issue. Both parties plan to spend big - they’ve got no choice if they want any chance of being elected since it’s a very major issue.

*Traffic and transport has oddly become an issue. If the public knew the full story that would cause a lot of trouble for the Liberals but luckily for them it’s not widely known so neither party has an edge there.

*Both are largely silent on the issue of finances beyond some limited claims here and there.

My personal expectation is that the Liberals will be returned with a clear majority.

It is also my expectation that whichever party forms government after this election will not be in government after the next one in 2022. That thought applies regardless of who wins this time.


----------



## Tisme (27 February 2018)

I remember when learning economics, one of the fundamental truths about taxation, apart from being an income for public service and utility, was that the higher the taxation the less capital inflow to the middle and lower classes and more to the wealthy elite, mainly because they afford the cash flows and infrastructure and control the means of production.

With the relaxation of taxation wages are supposed to increase and drive up consumption, drive up company revenue and profit, etc.  Hard to know how much life is left in consumerism, especially if China has to look inward for sales of product as the USA gears up for domestic production itself.


----------



## Tisme (27 February 2018)

*Michael Rowland*‏Verified account @mjrowland68
Final preparations underway for Federal Parliament’s special sitting in Altona next week. #auspol


----------



## SirRumpole (27 February 2018)

Why corporate tax cuts won't sell to the voters.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-...-done-but-where-are-the-profits-going/9490032


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2018)

Oh dear. The worst part of this is she thinks its appropriate to act like a spiteful big sister:

Of course if she has been withholding information about workplace infractions she is culpable.

See her in action first video

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-28/michaelia-cash-forced-to-withdraw-threats/9492838


----------



## SirRumpole (1 March 2018)

Tisme said:


> Oh dear. The worst part of this is she thinks its appropriate to act like a spiteful big sister:
> 
> Of course if she has been withholding information about workplace infractions she is culpable.
> 
> ...




Another resignation coming up ?

What a shrew.


----------



## Tisme (1 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Another resignation coming up ?
> 
> What a shrew.




Nasty piece of sh1t3 in anyone's language. Does nothing to further the argument that women in equity politics brings with it a less adversarial atmosphere and better governance. Now if only Tanya and Penny would just do the right thing and join a communist party (e.g. Greens)


----------



## wayneL (1 March 2018)

Tisme said:


> Nasty piece of sh1t3 in anyone's language. Does nothing to further the argument that women in equity politics brings with it a less adversarial atmosphere and better governance. Now if only Tanya and Penny would just do the right thing and join a communist party (e.g. Greens)



Or just  fade  away into a well deserved obscurity...


----------



## sptrawler (2 March 2018)

Tisme said:


> Nasty piece of sh1t3 in anyone's language. Does nothing to further the argument that women in equity politics brings with it a less adversarial atmosphere and better governance. Now if only Tanya and Penny would just do the right thing and join a communist party (e.g. Greens)




Maybe they could get Julia to return, and head up a "Women First Party", heaven help anyone who said anything against them.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 March 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Maybe they could get Julia to return, and head up a "Women First Party", heaven help anyone who said anything against them.




Julia was elected to the leadership mostly by men.


----------



## sptrawler (2 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Julia was elected to the leadership mostly by men.




Yeh, she was a real gem, that's why they replaced her with come again Kev.

But I can understand why men would vote for her, they would be too $hit scared not to.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 March 2018)

The Federal government will buy Snowy Hydro from NSW and Victoria.



And then what ?



Sell it off to their mates in business to make even more profit and push our power prices up even more ?



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-02/government-buys-out-states-snowy-hydro-shares-for-$6b/9500908


----------



## luutzu (2 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Why corporate tax cuts won't sell to the voters.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-...-done-but-where-are-the-profits-going/9490032




Heard on the radio that King Henry, or whatever his name is, Chairman of NAB?... He was quoted as saying that Australia ought to lower its corporate tax rate if it wants to remain "competitive" around the world.

Then, in the same breath... that it ought to increase its personal income tax rate because, I kid you not, you do not want Australia to be in a budget deficit. 

I thought corporate tax cuts pay for themselves, and then some. But apparently it's only to make Australia competitive, whatever that means because raising workers' taxes sounds a lot like taxing the poor to give to the rich.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 March 2018)

luutzu said:


> I thought corporate tax cuts pay for themselves, and then some. But apparently it's only to make Australia competitive, whatever that means because raising workers' taxes sounds a lot like taxing the poor to give to the rich.




You could cut the headline rate if you cut back generous concessions, deductions and rebates at the same time.

Say, the diesel fuel rebate - $6 billion a year estimated

Allow companies to write down only a third of their profits each year from past losses. I don't know how much this would save but it would get some companies paying tax again.

Eliminate "instant asset write offs" and go back to depreciation.

I'm sure there is a lot of other sweeteners that could be cracked down on.


----------



## luutzu (2 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> You could cut the headline rate if you cut back generous concessions, deductions and rebates at the same time.
> 
> Say, the diesel fuel rebate - $6 billion a year estimated
> 
> ...




Yea, that'd be sensible. But then why would mates do that kind of stuff to one another?


----------



## bellenuit (2 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> You could cut the headline rate if you cut back generous concessions, deductions and rebates at the same time.
> 
> ...
> 
> Allow companies to write down only a third of their profits each year from past losses.




You still don't get it. That is not a concession, it is just being fair. 



> I don't know how much this would save but it would get some companies paying tax again.




And how many would it drive out of business by making them bankrupt or simply chose to not bother because the government are now taxing their efforts to create jobs and provide services rather than their profits.

How do you think those companies will compete against overseas companies that don't have this same impost? Why would they bother. Just simply buy shares in overseas companies and you will likely make a lot more money that going into business for yourself.  



> Eliminate "instant asset write offs" and go back to depreciation.




Instant write-offs are depreciation but all in the same tax year. It is done as an incentive for companies to invest in new plant and equipment. The tax not paid the first year because of the ability to instantly write-off the asset cost, is paid in subsequent years as they can no longer depreciate that asset. Overall there is no difference in the tax paid by the company, just the timing of the payments.

You seem to have the attitude that businesses are our enemy and we should do everything possible to discourage them operating in Australia.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 March 2018)

> You seem to have the attitude that businesses are our enemy and we should do everything possible to discourage them operating in Australia.




What is the point of cutting the tax rate when the average tax actually paid is 17% ?

With the personal tax rate of up to 45% its pretty obvious that corporations simply aren't paying their share.

https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2017/10/turns-australias-company-tax-rate-isnt-high/

And what you don't get is that the benefit of company tax cuts will flow mainly to foreign shareholders not the average worker who haven't had pay increases for years.


----------



## bellenuit (2 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> What is the point of cutting the tax rate when the average tax actually paid is 17% ?




17% of what?



> With the personal tax rate of up to 45% its pretty obvious that corporations simply aren't paying their share.




Corporation's pay the wages that allow individuals to be taxed. They also pay payroll tax and GST on the value they have added. They pay 30% on profits. They also pay super contributions for individuals.

Companies are the lifeblood of the economy and without them we would have nothing, just some government run industries like the old style soviet block. Equating companies with individuals makes no sense. The more companies (in general) the better and we want to encourage them to set up here.

You cannot equate companies with individuals and say the company tax rate is fair or unfair based on what that rate is. The personal tax rate is up to 45%, but that isn't paid by anyone as it is the top rate of a progressive scale. Many people pay no tax and most pay a lot less that 45%.



> And what you don't get is that the benefit of company tax cuts will flow mainly to foreign shareholders not the average worker who haven't had pay increases for years.




For a lot of companies that are on the edge, the tax rate cut may be just what keeps them viable. If you believe that tax rate cuts will have no benefit, then you must either hold that the converse is true (increasing the company tax rate will have no adverse effect so we might as well make it 100%) or you must believe that we are currently in the sweet spot.

There will be many who benefit from the tax rate cut. That some may be foreign shareholders doesn't mean anything. Some of the extra cash will go to employees, some will go to expansion, some will go as dividends to direct shareholders and indirectly to almost all people who have super.

It will make companies a bit more competitive and that is positive for all companies.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 March 2018)

bellenuit said:


> 17% of what?




Read the article I posted.



> Corporation's pay the wages that allow individuals to be taxed.




They are increasingly investing in automation and killing jobs.



> Companies are the lifeblood of the economy and without them we would have nothing,




So you are advocating a tax rate of 0% ?



> That some may be foreign shareholders doesn't mean anything.




Yes it does. It's money that is not spent in our economy.



> The more companies (in general) the better and we want to encourage them to set up here.




Companies go where the market is and that means consumers who have money to spend.


----------



## luutzu (2 March 2018)

bellenuit said:


> 17% of what?
> 
> Corporation's pay the wages that allow individuals to be taxed. They also pay payroll tax and GST on the value they have added. They pay 30% on profits. They also pay super contributions for individuals.
> 
> ...




Ha!

If cutting corporate tax is to benefit "all of us" - the workers, the taxpayers, the baker and his wife and her investment portfolio... If that's the aim, why go round about to achieve it? Why not just give those benefits directly to the people instead of the corporations.

Trump's $1.5T corporate tax cut didn't benefit anyone beside the corporation and its shareholders. And unless you reckon the average folk own any significant amount or have any influence on corporations regarding wages, environmental concerns, taxes, investment decision... yah, sure, benefits will trickle down.

That's why they have to cut back on social programes, cut back on public school funding, on food aid to the poor, the young, the sick and the elderly... All because, oh yah, tax cuts trickles down too much to those people their few bucks have to be taken away to help reduce the deficit.

Same crap I heard today on the radio. Cut corporate tax but increase individual income tax - it's the budget deficit, stop being irresponsible.


And big deal companies have to pay payroll, pay employees, pay GST. 

btw, how are they paying GST really? At the same rate as consumers? GST they collect for goods and services are net against those they paid on buying/hiring goods and services. 

Can an individual claim against GST? 

Are all expenses necessary for an employee to earn their income deductible. As they are for corporations?

The housing tax deductible? The power bills, the food consumed? 

So who's paying more taxes?

And what's this about paying employee. Want people to work for free? 

Unless the company hire and pay people to do nothing, it's a bit rich to complain that people who do work for corporations get paid. 


If the aim of any tax cut is to increase economic productivity, cut taxes to the masses, not corporations.

It is the masses, i.e. the people, who will spend (invest) all of the proceeds of those tax cuts. And spent it mostly locally. 

Such spending as food, a home, a rennovation, a car service, a new(er) car, a few special outings to celebrate an anniversary...

Those are investment that will drive demand. Demand will be met with increasing supply... Supply increase through hiring of people, hiring contractors to expand etc. etc.

Give cash to corporations, particularly multi-nationals where the entire world and all its tax havens are their market and what do you get? You get money being pushed to wherever there are demand. 

I mean, why in the heck would any company open a factory to supply goods to people who haven't the cash to buy it?


----------



## bellenuit (2 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Read the article I posted.




Yes, and the 17% isn't on profits as I suspected. Excluding allowable cost deductions and then basing the tax paid on the gross profit without those deductions is just Alberici over again. Then they arrive at average tax rate by averaging this misleading figure across all industries in the survey.



> They are increasingly investing in automation and killing jobs.




Some are. But you solve that by providing incentives to those who provide better employment opportunities. Some companies have no choice but to automate to stay competitive, but even then it can be better keeping them here than letting those business go overseas. Some jobs are better than no jobs and having a portion of profits distributed here is better than none distributed here.

Something that should be considered is the Future Fund investing more in Australian industry (and the Government contributing more to the fund so that they can do that). You can't stop automation and if the Future Fund reaps the benefit of increased automation through increased profits in the industries they invest in, that goes towards mitigating the effect of the tax loss. But that is something worthy of a thread in its own right. It is something we should be looking at getting on top of right now as the trends are showing that is where industry is heading.



> So you are advocating a tax rate of 0% ?




No. We should aim for a company tax rate that is optimal. The company tax rate (and company incentives etc.) should be set at a level that will be optimal for the country as a whole. Equity with personal tax rates doesn't come into play. It is quite possible that for certain countries, a zero company tax rate is optimal. If the country is such that there is no reason for businesses to locate there, providing a zero or near zero tax rate may be the answer. If companies locate there, they will provide employment and infrastructure. Employees' income tax receipts will help the government's tax coffers. You need tax to provide services and it can be better to have good employment producing employee tax combined with low company tax than getting no tax at all if there were no companies and thus zero employment. 

Countries like Ireland underwent a massive increase in living standards by providing a low tax environment and investment incentives to attract foreign businesses. It was also one of the reasons for Singapore's early success.

That is not to say that a lower tax rate is always the answer. Countries with natural business advantages (a highly educated population, close access to markets, a well developed infrastructure) can set relatively higher company tax rates as those advantages translate into lower costs for the business which in turn can offset the higher tax rate.

The point is is that the company tax rate is not something that should be viewed as something that has to be in line with personal tax rates. The latter are meaningless if no-one is employed. 



> Yes it does. It's money that is not spent in our economy.




If the shareholders are overseas corporations that are extracting profits from their Australian subsidiaries, then increased local profitability is likely to encourage increased investment in those subsidiaries. It's all about the attractiveness of investment choices. It makes Australia more attractive and should mean an increase in investment. Its a numbers game. 

Even for non-corporate foreign investors, this is part and parcel of open stock markets. Australians have shares overseas and gain if those companies distribute bigger dividends. 

Any decision on corporate tax rates will result in some winners and some losers. As I said you must try to do what is optimal for the country. Just because some non-residents may benefit doesn't mean that a change should be rejected.

Also, the fact that overseas private investors gain more is due to our imputation system. They cannot offset company tax paid so directly benefit from a lower company tax rate. 



> Companies go where the market is and that means consumers who have money to spend.




Completely wrong, companies go where they can maximise profits and that is often not where their consumers are. Transportation costs are just one cost factor of the overall product cost and is often overshadowed by the costs saving attributable to the other product cost inputs (company tax rates are also a factor as mentioned). That is the reason companies are locating to Thailand and Vietnam and Eastern Europe.


One part of the referenced article stood out and that was this: _And for companies considering investment decisions, the best way to measure corporate tax is through comparing what’s known as effective tax rates…

Our average corporate tax rate, however, is just 17 per cent, and when it comes to effective corporate taxes, companies in Australia pay just 10.4 per cent._

Even if we accept that decisions are made on effective or average rates, it is ignoring that reducing our headline rate will also lower those two figures. And the elephant in the room that both Alberici and that article overlooked is that it is ignoring the impact of the US lowering its corporate tax rate. It may well be that we are currently in a sweet spot when it comes to our corporate tax rate, but will that be the case now that the US has lowered rates (and probably a few other countries following suit).

The fault in the arguments that lowering corporate tax rates will have no effect (or at least no positive effect) is that unless we have arrived at the current rate by miraculous luck, then could the same argument be applied if our corporate rate was 40% instead of 30%. And if so, then we should increase the rate to 40% (and why then not 50%). The true answer is that 30% prior to the US move might be close to optimal, but following the US move we are going to have to re-assess our rate as we need to remain competitive.


----------



## SirRumpole (2 March 2018)

bellenuit said:


> Something that should be considered is the Future Fund investing more in Australian industry (and the Government contributing more to the fund so that they can do that). You can't stop automation and if the Future Fund reaps the benefit of increased automation through increased profits in the industries they invest in, that goes towards mitigating the effect of the tax loss. But that is something worthy of a thread in its own right. It is something we should be looking at getting on top of right now as the trends are showing that is where industry is heading.




Basically the first thing you have said that I agree with. 



bellenuit said:


> The true answer is that 30% prior to the US move might be close to optimal, but following the US move we are going to have to re-assess our rate as we need to remain competitive.




You are aware that most US States also levy corporate profits tax , ranging from about 4% -12% ?


----------



## bellenuit (3 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Basically the first thing you have said that I agree with.




Well you did say a few days ago that you know little about accounting (or words to that effect), so I am not surprised you disagree with most of what I write.



> You are aware that most US States also levy corporate profits tax , ranging from about 4% -12% ?




It's the relative difference between each countries' overall tax burden (among other things) that is important as to where investment moneys flow. That has now changed due to Trump's tax cut.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2018)

bellenuit said:


> Well you did say a few days ago that you know little about accounting (or words to that effect), so I am not surprised you disagree with most of what I write.




A lot of economists disagree with you about the effectiveness of corporate tax cuts, as do you also apparently.



			
				bellenuit Post #2726  said:
			
		

> but to attack attempts to reduce the company tax rate (*which btw I don't agree with, at least not as a priority)*.


----------



## bellenuit (3 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> A lot of economists disagree with you about the effectiveness of corporate tax cuts, as do you also apparently.




As I said, they should decide what is optimal for Australia under the new circumstances. My gripe is mainly with the ABC and their unbalanced analysis of the issue (using only their go-to economists that hold similar views) and in particular Alberici's misleading use of the wrong figures in her first article. My response to your posts today were based on your suggestions for increasing the corporate tax take, which almost every accountant knows would cause thousands of small businesses and many large business to collapse and others to simply give up, if implemented.


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2018)

Death and taxes.

If it's anything like the "good economic managers" they self process to be, the real simplistic focus will be on magic bullets.

One thing for sure will be the public service continuing to bloated, to be over paid and us over governed.

Basic purposes and objectives of taxation with current score sheet:

1) pay for the public service (tick)
2) balance of payments (strike)
3) income inequality (strike)
4) dampen perturbations and deep cycles (tick)
5) inflation price stabilisation (tick)
6) employment/productivity headline/underemployment rate  (meh)
7)  economic development (strike)
8) debt mitigation (strike)


----------



## SirRumpole (3 March 2018)

7. economic development  means infrastructure which business uses to make their activities more efficient. Business should contribute to this instead of running away from their obligations.


----------



## IFocus (3 March 2018)

On the tax thing Ken Henry has wayed in saying corporate tax cuts on their own is BS, (more example of lazy Liberals Keating quote) it can be done but needs to be a part of tax reform (includes a resource  tax and more )to fix the current mess so that the system works to generate growth and efficiencies.

LNP talking corporate tax cuts generating jobs and wage growth is really quite appalling.


----------



## Tisme (3 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> 7. economic development  means infrastructure which business uses to make their activities more efficient. Business should contribute to this instead of running away from their obligations.





QIC invest overseas because it can't find enough viable projects to sink its billions into.


----------



## Logique (4 March 2018)

What kind of self-destructive state of mind would you need to be in?  

Has Barnaby any concept of how hurtful it is to question the paternity of the child?

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...-of-vikki-campion-s-baby-20180303-p4z2ob.html


----------



## Tisme (4 March 2018)

Logique said:


> What kind of self-destructive state of mind would you need to be in?
> 
> Has Barnaby any concept of how hurtful it is to question the paternity of the child?
> 
> https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...-of-vikki-campion-s-baby-20180303-p4z2ob.html





I think there's plenty of hurtful stuff done before this that the child will read in due course. I haven't got too much empathy for the two adults who betrayed the vows of trust in marriage.


----------



## sptrawler (5 March 2018)

I wonder if will be found out, to be a miss quote, just to drill in another nail.lol


----------



## dutchie (5 March 2018)

dutchie said:


> I assume Turnbull is ready to resign when he hits 30 negative Newspolls (he's at 27 at moment).



28 
2 to go Malcolm.


----------



## Tisme (7 March 2018)

The latest score card on relaxed penalty rates results are in : no extra jobs, no trickle down.

I guess supply and demand really are intertwined after all and the LNP aren't so clever. 

That's more income tax dollars the treasury will miss out on.


----------



## Tisme (8 March 2018)

This, I think this is the LNP's biggest failure = the preoccupation with slurring Labor instead of explaining and delivering their own agenda:


----------



## sptrawler (9 March 2018)

I have to agree, Turnbull as was expected, has become a backseat driver in a car crash.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 March 2018)

Some more ill thought out legislation in my view.

No thought of banning political donations from foreign companies, but the ordinary citizen and charities get caught in a trap.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-...nder-coalition-anti-interference-laws/9549052


----------



## Smurf1976 (15 March 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I have to agree, Turnbull as was expected, has become a backseat driver in a car crash.



So far as future planning and the economy is concerned, the last decent leadership we had came from Keating and before that Hawke with Keating as Treasurer.

I didn't like the man as such, Keating was way to arrogant and not really PM material in my view, but his thinking and determination exceeds that of Howard, Rudd, Gillard, Abbott and Turnbull put together.

It'll take a serious recession, financial incident, war or major natural disaster to focus our leaders I think. Sad but I can't see anything else that will do it.

Recession = a proper one where no twisting of statistics can possibly hide the fact that the country and every state is in recession and where the economic situation is the overwhelmingly dominant theme of public debate. 

Financial incident = something on the scale of one of the major banks actually does collapse or the ASX drops 80%.

War = I mean a real one where Australia is credibly threatened by a foreign power or at least one where we're sending tens of thousands of troops off overseas and with conscription either in force or at least seriously debated. 

Natural disaster = one on the scale of a capital city CBD hit by a major earthquake or something that leaves a million people homeless. 

I most certainly don't wish for any of those things but it'll take something of that magnitude to get any real focus I think. Until that happens we'll just muddle along with weak leadership from both of the major parties.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 March 2018)

Why is Dutton poking his nose into the internal affairs of another country ?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-...a-to-help-white-south-african-farmers/9550050


----------



## Tisme (16 March 2018)

Peter Dutton is offering help to South African white farmers. Can't think why whites need help there:



> Anti-whites chant “White man you must die” today at the Afrikaans high school in Verieniging, Johannesburg. Total black out from the western media, they want it swept under the rug.


----------



## Tisme (18 March 2018)

Hindsight scorecard?


----------



## sptrawler (21 March 2018)

Interesting article, for anyone that is interested, make of it what you will.

https://theconversation.com/government-spending-explained-in-10-charts-from-howard-to-turnbull-77158


----------



## PZ99 (21 March 2018)

Yeah well.... I did say in another thread that we have become a welfare state


----------



## SirRumpole (21 March 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Yeah well.... I did say in another thread that we have become a welfare state




If they want to save on 'welfare' then they could limit Family Tax Benefits to three children.

That would save billions and provide a disincentive to those parts of the community that breed for the benefits.


----------



## PZ99 (21 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> If they want to save on 'welfare' then they could limit Family Tax Benefits to three children.
> 
> That would save billions and provide a disincentive to those parts of the community that breed for the benefits.



They could do that but I'm looking more at the vast array of tax deductions that really aren't all that necessary and in some cases, obsolete. Neg gearing for starters.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 March 2018)

PZ99 said:


> They could do that but I'm looking more at the vast array of tax deductions that really aren't all that necessary and in some cases, obsolete. Neg gearing for starters.




That as well, every bit helps.


----------



## Junior (21 March 2018)

PZ99 said:


> They could do that but I'm looking more at the vast array of tax deductions that really aren't all that necessary and in some cases, obsolete. Neg gearing for starters.




Agreed.  I'd like to see Neg Gearing killed off, with a partial offset in the form of lower personal tax rates.  

As much as the relentless attack on the superannuation system is excessive... the ability to receive excess franking credits as a tax refund is unsustainable and should be wound back over time.  We have an ageing population, and the current situation where those over 65 pay no income tax AT ALL, and even receive a tax refund in many cases, unfortunately can't continue.  The working population has to fund these luxuries.

Closing these loopholes *should *facilitate an increase in the tax-free threshold and a general lowering of individual & company tax rates, in my opinion.


----------



## Logique (21 March 2018)

What is unsustainable - is to single out one group of investors, and ask them to pay double taxation on the same investments, i.e. commercial, plus personal.  Especially when it is based on the invented story that this group is somehow well off, and doesn't need it. Labor has provided no evidence to back this claim.

Back in 1998, when Labor cared about retirees, they backed imputation credits to them.  But now retirees are just an easy target, and the fix is in. 

Labor has jumped the shark on this policy, and placed at risk the more reasonable propositions of abandoning negative gearing, and reducing of capital gains discount on property ownership.


----------



## Junior (21 March 2018)

Logique said:


> Labor has jumped the shark on this policy, and placed at risk the more reasonable propositions of abandoning negative gearing, and reducing of capital gains discount on property ownership.




Too much at once perhaps.

I suspect the vast 'savings' generated by these measures, will largely be gifted back to voters one way or the other.  Perhaps they are saving these announcements for closer to the election, and releasing the bad news first up.

The manner in which the Labor Party intends on spending this money is key, and I think people who are trying to fund their own retirement need some relief as part of this, given how much has been taken away in recent years.


----------



## Knobby22 (21 March 2018)

The truth is that no sane young person would vote for the Libs at the moment as they see the young subsidising the old. The Libs know this, I heard adds on the radio today driving back from a meeting saying how the government are helping people buy their first home (using a special savings account or their super). Smacks of desperation.


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2018)

Junior said:


> Too much at once perhaps.
> 
> I suspect the vast 'savings' generated by these measures, will largely be gifted back to voters one way or the other.  Perhaps they are saving these announcements for closer to the election, and releasing the bad news first up.
> 
> The manner in which the Labor Party intends on spending this money is key, and I think people who are trying to fund their own retirement need some relief as part of this, given how much has been taken away in recent years.




I think the horse has bolted with super, Junior, if Labor look like getting in watch what happens with super.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 March 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I think the horse has bolted with super, Junior, if Labor look like getting in watch what happens with super.




Again, super is a Labor policy, why would they trash it ?


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Again, super is a Labor policy, why would they trash it ?



That seems to be the question, everyone is asking.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 March 2018)

sptrawler said:


> That seems to be the question, everyone is asking.




The answer is that they wouldn't and suggestions to the contrary are a scare campaign.


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The answer is that they wouldn't and suggestions to the contrary are a scare campaign.



You think so?
You explain to me, why any young person, or indeed anybody would put any of their own money into super?
I'll look forward to your answer tomorrow, when you have thought of something.lol


----------



## SirRumpole (22 March 2018)

sptrawler said:


> You think so?
> You explain to me, why any young person, or indeed anybody would put any of their own money into super?




Young people can't even afford a house, they can't afford to put extra cash into super.


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Young people can't even afford a house, they can't afford to put extra cash into super.




That really didn't answer the question, I said why would anyone put any of their own money into super?
Still struggling to find an answer?


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2018)

Rumpy, I would go as far as to say, if I was still working I would be demanding the union push for a pay rise, rather than an increase in the employer superannuation contribution.
The current attack on super by both parties, just highlights how little say you have, in money that is apparently put away for you. LOL
So why the hell would you forego pay rises, to put more in, let alone add some of your own money that could be paying something off now?
Dumb politics. IMO


----------



## PZ99 (22 March 2018)

sptrawler said:


> You think so?
> You explain to me, why any young person, or indeed anybody would put any of their own money into super?
> I'll look forward to your answer tomorrow, when you have thought of something.lol



They wouldn't. 

But it's got nothing to do with politics. Young people don't look at that stage because it's too far away and they are usually maxed out in debt. Ask anyone under 40 about the super rules and I reckon you'll be struggling to get a correct answer.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 March 2018)

sptrawler said:


> That really didn't answer the question, I said why would anyone put any of their own money into super?
> Still struggling to find an answer?




So that they can have a relatively comfortable retirement and not have to rely on a meagre government pension.


----------



## Junior (22 March 2018)

sptrawler said:


> That really didn't answer the question, I said why would anyone put any of their own money into super?
> Still struggling to find an answer?




The fundamentals haven't really changed for a middle-income worker.

* Contributions into super are tax deductible and then taxed at 15% in the Fund (so a tax saving of at least 15% for the average worker)
* Earnings tax in super is 15% (versus MTR of >30% outside super)
* Earnings tax in retirement of 0%
* Pension income taxed at 0%

Still an attractive system for most.


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> So that they can have a relatively comfortable retirement and not have to rely on a meagre government pension.




They can do that outside of super and have the security of knowledge, that they can spend it as and when they want to.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 March 2018)

sptrawler said:


> They can do that outside of super and have the security of knowledge, that they can spend it as and when they want to.




They can convert super to a lump sum and do the same thing.


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2018)

Junior said:


> The fundamentals haven't really changed for a middle-income worker.
> 
> * Contributions into super are tax deductible and then taxed at 15% in the Fund (so a tax saving of at least 15% for the average worker)
> * Earnings tax in super is 15% (versus MTR of >30% outside super)
> ...



The down side to this, is as has been shown lately, you have no control over the final outcome.
For example, what is to stop the politicians, from forcing super to be taken as an annuity?
Or in fact placing a tax on earnings, in retirement phase, as Labor suggested at the previous election.
As I said earlier, the underlying belief that super is your money, to help you enjoy a better retirement has been completely shattered.
Labor has shown it is their money, not yours, and they will decide how you will use it.
Why anyone would put extra in, is a mystery to me.


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> They can convert super to a lump sum and do the same thing.




That will be stopped next, take that to the bank.


----------



## Junior (22 March 2018)

sptrawler said:


> For example, what is to stop the politicians, from forcing super to be taken as an annuity?
> Or in fact placing a tax on earnings, in retirement phase, as Labor suggested at the previous election.




Because they will be voted out of office.

It's one thing trying to cap account balance at $1.6mill or scale back refund of excess franking credits, another thing trying to restrict lump-sum access to super for everyone, or to apply a tax on earnings which could exceed personal tax rates.  This impacts the entire population and would be a very, very unpopular measure.  It won't happen.

As a side-note, I do not advocate that those under 40 or 50 years old make additional super contributions.  But certainly those who are <10 years away from retirement should seek to include super conts as a key component of their retirement plan, IMO.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 March 2018)

sptrawler said:


> That will be stopped next, take that to the bank.




It was actually the Libs who attacked super.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...-by-abbott-super-changes-20140903-10by18.html


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> It was actually the Libs who attacked super.
> 
> https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...-by-abbott-super-changes-20140903-10by18.html




The Libs only capped what could be put in, or held in super, not how it is treated.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 March 2018)

sptrawler said:


> The Libs only capped what could be put in, or held in super, not how it is treated.




So why should they do that ?


----------



## Junior (22 March 2018)

Tax legislation changes all the time, under any Government.  We can only plan based on the rules as they exist, and allow ourselves flexibility in the event they do change.

If there is a massive tax saving to be had by increasing your super conts, that simply needs to be weighed up against the risk that the Government will change the rules again.


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> So why should they do that ?




By doing that, it stops people amassing 10 of millions of dollars in super, which then just makes it tax avoidance.
But it still makes it a reasonable investment vehicle, in which workers can invest extra money to get a better retirement it would even attract people to sell a well located principal residence to put the money in(which I did).
What Labor suggested pre the last election, of taxing super pensions when they reach $100,000 per anum wasn't a bad idea. 
What they are suggesting now, when the limits on pension have been dropped, and they are using  figures pre the new limits to justify it. 
Is just blatant lying, to support ridiculously oppressive measures. IMO


----------



## SirRumpole (22 March 2018)

sptrawler said:


> By doing that, it stops people amassing 10 of millions of dollars in super, which then just makes it tax avoidance.




It's tax avoidance to pay only 15% tax on super contributions.


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> It's tax avoidance to pay only 15% tax on super contributions.



It's tax avoidance, to spend all your money pre retirement, and get a full pension tax free.
At least super pays 15% on earnings, in accumulation, and doesn't get the first $18,000 tax free.


----------



## bellenuit (22 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> It's tax avoidance to pay only 15% tax on super contributions.




It's not tax avoidance to pay the designated tax rate.


----------



## SirRumpole (22 March 2018)

bellenuit said:


> It's not tax avoidance to pay the designated tax rate.




Sure , but the legislation has been designed to let upper income earners avoid tax.


----------



## sptrawler (22 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Sure , but the legislation has been designed to let upper income earners avoid tax.




That's why the caps were put on last year, to limit how much someone can have in a super funded pension.

Maybe they should apply some limits, to how much tax payer funded pension you can get, commensurate with how much tax you have paid, or how many years you've worked, unless you have a disability?

See how that would go down with the untouchables. lol


----------



## SirRumpole (24 March 2018)

For God's sake, don't bring out the truth, it could cause a loss of confidence 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-...cause-a-credit-crunch-and-hit-economy/9579654


----------



## sptrawler (24 March 2018)

Anyway Rumpy your safe, no one is going to touch you, sit back and enjoy.

Getting back to Turnbull, he really needs to think about stepping down and giving the next generation a go.
How the hell Billy, has got into a position of being muted as the next PM, is down to Turnbull.
He has made the unelectable, possible, that's a travesty.


----------



## dutchie (26 March 2018)

dutchie said:


> 28
> 2 to go Malcolm.



29, 1 to go Malcolm


----------



## Tisme (26 March 2018)

dutchie said:


> 29, 1 to go Malcolm




The next figures will be cooked to show an improvement ......


----------



## PZ99 (26 March 2018)

I reckon the next figures will conveniently coincide with a win for the Govt on company tax cuts.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 March 2018)

*Tax concessions to wealthy costing six times the dole: Anglicare*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-...elfare-costs-in-perspective-anglicare/9585930


----------



## Tisme (26 March 2018)

PZ99 said:


> I reckon the next figures will conveniently coincide with a win for the Govt on company tax cuts.




Guaranteed vote getter is to link corporate tax cuts and subsequent wage increase to employee EBA signed undertaking to vote LNP and denounce Greens as social cancer.... democracy in action right there.


----------



## sptrawler (26 March 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> *Tax concessions to wealthy costing six times the dole: Anglicare*
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-...elfare-costs-in-perspective-anglicare/9585930



Wow, that would be a well researched and unbiased report.


----------



## SirRumpole (11 April 2018)

One thing I agree with Tony Abbott (and Peter Dutton) about:-

*Tony Abbott says Malcolm Turnbull has his 'knickers in a twist' over migration policy*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-11/abbott-attacks-turnbull-over-immigration-report-denial/9640784


----------



## dutchie (12 April 2018)

dutchie said:


> 29, 1 to go Malcolm



Congratulations Malcolm! 
You've cracked 30 bad polls. By your own criteria you have to go.
It's time to give the next non conservative his (not hers) go at 30 polls. (doesn't matter who really - your all out of touch).


----------



## SirRumpole (12 April 2018)

dutchie said:


> (doesn't matter who really - your all out of touch).




+1.


----------



## Tisme (12 April 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> One thing I agree with Tony Abbott (and Peter Dutton) about:-
> 
> *Tony Abbott says Malcolm Turnbull has his 'knickers in a twist' over migration policy*
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-11/abbott-attacks-turnbull-over-immigration-report-denial/9640784




"
"Why on earth the Prime Minister himself and other senior ministers have got their knickers in a twist to deny that Peter Dutton raised this issue has got me beat," he said.

"About the only thing the Commonwealth Government can do to take the downward pressure off wages, the upward pressure off housing prices and unclog our roads — given infrastructure takes a long time to build — is to scale back the rate of immigration.

"So you'd think that a sensible government would have been happy to discuss the rate of immigration."

Mr Abbott said Mr Turnbull was behaving like a *"*clever barrister" and his denials could hurt the Government.  

"He's made the Government look tricky, and that's not what the Government should appear to be, particularly when there's nothing wrong with having a discussion about bringing the immigration numbers down.""


----------



## SirRumpole (12 April 2018)

Looks like Turnbull is super sensitive not to upset the migrant mafia.


----------



## PZ99 (12 April 2018)

Another attempt to sabotage the Govt at war with itself. Rather than knickers in a twist it's more like crossed wires. Anyone familiar with audio will know when one side has the wrong wiring you go out of phase and lose your bass. It's usually the right that's wrong 

With two sets of 30 Newspoll losses in two terms this fractured Govt has lost its base


----------



## Tisme (12 April 2018)

Ever since the SSM plebiscite I have very little faith that anywhere near the majority of voter drones have a clue what's good for the nation and incapable of making a considered vote based on anything but blind obedience to welded on propaganda and/or marxist driven pop culture. 

It seems to me that all the LNP have to do is show its incumbent prime ministers the door every three years to convince the electorate that a proxy vote has already occurred and rubber stamping via the polls is all that is required to validate it.


----------



## Smurf1976 (12 April 2018)

Tisme said:


> Ever since the SSM plebiscite I have very little faith that anywhere near the majority of voter drones have a clue what's good



Very few people think and the standard of public debate is terrible these days.

The media has a lot to answer for there. There was a time when TV programs such as A Current Affair could actually make or break a government and where stories about dodgy car salesmen and weight loss programs etc would never have made it to air since they're just too unimportant.

The last PM we had with any sort of real vision was Keating. I didn't like his manner but he was an order of magnitude better than what has followed in terms of actually having a brain and thinking toward the future. Everyone since, on both sides of politics, has been at best focused on the present and at worst outright useless. The odd good thing here and there but as a whole they're duds.


----------



## dutchie (12 April 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> Everyone since, on both sides of politics, has been at best focused on the present and at worst outright useless. The odd good thing here and there but as a whole they're duds.



The *sole* aim of any new government, from day one, is to be re-elected at the *next* election.
Absolutely nothing else matters.


----------



## wayneL (12 April 2018)

I would love a Keating of any stripe these days.

Well,  except if he was green. But then,  a Keating wouldn't be, would he?


----------



## Smurf1976 (12 April 2018)

dutchie said:


> The *sole* aim of any new government, from day one, is to be re-elected at the *next* election.
> Absolutely nothing else matters.



Agreed for most of them but I can think of exceptions.

Eg Michael Field, premier of Tas 1989-92, would surely have realised he was going down a track that had no chance of getting his government re-elected. Saved the state from bankruptcy though but sure wasn’t popular at the time.

Jeff Kennett in Vic probably much the same. 

At the national level Hawke / Keating weren’t exactly known for popular budgets. 

Agreed in most cases though.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 April 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> At the national level Hawke / Keating weren’t exactly known for popular budgets.




Abbott/Hockey made great efforts *not* to get re-elected, and almost pulled it off.


----------



## Tisme (12 April 2018)

wayneL said:


> I would love a Keating of any stripe these days.
> 
> Well,  except if he was green. But then,  a Keating wouldn't be, would he?




One of my farcebook tonic and leveler pages:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/28819960090/?ref=br_rs


----------



## moXJO (22 April 2018)

I think libs are gone next election. The government never felt cohesive. 

 Labor has kept themselves small enough targets. Bill basically stands on the fence on every issue.


----------



## Tisme (23 April 2018)

moXJO said:


> I think libs are gone next election. The government never felt cohesive.
> 
> Labor has kept themselves small enough targets. Bill basically stands on the fence on every issue.





He's a lurker


----------



## SirRumpole (23 April 2018)

Tisme said:


> He's a lurker




So was John Howard.

He had bugger all policy and beat Keating on the grounds that Keating was arrogant.


----------



## Tisme (23 April 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> So was John Howard.
> 
> He had bugger all policy and beat Keating on the grounds that Keating was arrogant.




Keating was dethroned because he was portrayed as betraying his wife by divorce and a concurrent viscous rumour he was a closet gay..... who would have put that one around .... those who wanted payback for "two blokes and a cocker spaniel" don't make a family and the new breed of Abbottesque Labor hating Liberals and News Ltd editors.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 April 2018)

Tisme said:


> Keating was dethroned because he was portrayed as betraying his wife by divorce and a concurrent viscous rumour he was a closet gay..... who would have put that one around .... those who wanted payback for "two blokes and a cocker spaniel" don't make a family and the new breed of Abbottesque Labor hating Liberals and News Ltd editors.




I never heard that "closet gay" rumour. Maybe I just didn't read News Ltd enough.


----------



## Tisme (23 April 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I never heard that "closet gay" rumour. Maybe I just didn't read News Ltd enough.




Did you vote Liberal ?

I voted Keating because he was good for business and I admired his obvious intelligence. I guess I'm not the great bellwether I'd like to think I was.... the latest failure being the plebiscite. I remind myself of  Boris Badenov and Wrongway Peachfuzz montage when it comes to social fads.


----------



## Tisme (23 April 2018)

Ex NAB executive staying loyal to her roots ( I wonder if her dirty linen will be exposed)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-...e-governmen-wrong-on-royal-commission/9685012

"
O'Dwyer: I've answered your question.

Cassidy: No you haven't.

O'Dwyer: I have answered your question.

Cassidy: You haven't said whether you were wrong or right to delay it.

O'Dwyer: I've said we've established it. We have in fact established it.

Cassidy: You have established it, but it took a long time coming. Were you wrong?

O'Dwyer: Well let me put it to you this way. We would not have done all those other things that we would otherwise have done to address these actions."


----------



## SirRumpole (23 April 2018)

Wasn't the idea of Robocalls to reduce staff in CentreLink ?

Now that the government has announced another 1250 people for the CentreLink call centre one would have to assume that Robocalls are another Turnbull government failure.


----------



## Tisme (23 April 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Wasn't the idea of Robocalls to reduce staff in CentreLink ?
> 
> Now that the government has announced another 1250 people for the CentreLink call centre one would have to assume that Robocalls are another Turnbull government failure.




The LNP never hand out carrots unless there is a stick. Aren't they going after recipients who have been over paid?


----------



## SirRumpole (23 April 2018)

Tisme said:


> Aren't they going after recipients who have been over paid?




That's what Robocall was all about, using automated software to extract money from over paid clients, the point being that it was supposed to reduce the number of Centrelink staff. It apparently hasn't worked as they are now putting on extra staff to handle the complaints generated by Robocalls.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 April 2018)

Why personal income tax cuts are better than corporate tax cuts.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-24/do-we-need-personal-income-tax-cuts/9688762


----------



## Tisme (24 April 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> That's what Robocall was all about, using automated software to extract money from over paid clients, the point being that it was supposed to reduce the number of Centrelink staff. It apparently hasn't worked as they are now putting on extra staff to handle the complaints generated by Robocalls.




So it's backlog, not actually a growth in welfare "clients" ?


----------



## SirRumpole (24 April 2018)

Tisme said:


> So it's backlog, not actually a growth in welfare "clients" ?




I think it's the current clients complaining about being having benefits cut back rather than extra clients.


----------



## PZ99 (24 April 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Why personal income tax cuts are better than corporate tax cuts.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-24/do-we-need-personal-income-tax-cuts/9688762



I think the removal of payroll tax is better than both even if it is up to the states.

It's a magic bullet in reducing labour costs without bludgeoning your staff IMO.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 April 2018)

PZ99 said:


> I think the removal of payroll tax is better than both even if it is up to the states.
> 
> It's a magic bullet in reducing labour costs without bludgeoning your staff IMO.




Yes, you could be right but those tax cuts don't flow through to consumers as would personal tax cuts.

How come the States got away with keeping payroll tax ? I thought it was supposed to go when the GST came in.


----------



## Tisme (24 April 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I think it's the current clients complaining about being having benefits cut back rather than extra clients.




ABS data shows a 2% decline in average household income to <$110k. Those with main source of income from pension and govt has risen from 23% in 2006 to around 24%.


----------



## PZ99 (24 April 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, you could be right but those tax cuts don't flow through to consumers as would personal tax cuts.
> 
> How come the States got away with keeping payroll tax ? I thought it was supposed to go when the GST came in.



LOL, yeah. Along with all the other taxes that were supposed to go including stamp duty.
But... the treasures of the states became heroes of budget surpluses instead.

Payroll tax does get altered every now and then for economic stimulatory but of course that applies to any other tax including P.A.Y.E.

I just think payroll tax is an archaic and unnecessary burden on business and if we accept the idea of tax as a disincentive then it's little more than a nonsensical barrier to employment.


----------



## IFocus (27 April 2018)

Has anyone else heard about the $3.8 bil give away to irrigators for zero water return?

Surprised it's not front page............well maybe not to much infighting to make room


----------



## Tisme (29 April 2018)

http://www.essentialvision.com.au/category/essentialreport

Worth a read of how a sample group is thinking


----------



## SirRumpole (29 April 2018)

Tisme said:


> http://www.essentialvision.com.au/category/essentialreport
> 
> Worth a read of how a sample group is thinking




Pretty stable isn't it ?

Govt obviously will gamble on handouts to make up the gap.


----------



## Tisme (1 May 2018)

lol


----------



## Tisme (2 May 2018)

More spend



> Pauline Hanson's Please Explain
> 8 hrs ·
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## SirRumpole (2 May 2018)

Tisme said:


> More spend




It may pay off if the educated ones return to their own country and spread the word about Oz being a generous place and not a bunch of racists.


----------



## PZ99 (2 May 2018)

Subtract the money off the $3.9 billion in foreign aid. Too easy.


----------



## Tink (9 May 2018)

Budget 2018

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-08/federal-budget-2018-winners-losers/9738982?section=politics


----------



## Tisme (9 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> It may pay off if the educated ones return to their own country and spread the word about Oz being a generous place and not a bunch of racists.




Well I would think they would be fairly pleased with the current racist fad, by our first and second gen migrants, of persecuting straight, white, austral-anglos males.

Put Chinese people in a room with Indians and there's world harmony personified on display. Put Israel Folau in a room of fag rugby players and watch the love. Ask the millions of "bonded labourers" (slaves) how they feel about their African rulers, how the Somali Bantu feel, how well the Black Moors are regarded. etc.


----------



## Tisme (9 May 2018)

Tink said:


> Budget 2018
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-08/federal-budget-2018-winners-losers/9738982?section=politics




Repairing big black labor holes six years in with a 10+4+ neverland year plan. What was that big black hole six year ago and what is it now?


----------



## SirRumpole (9 May 2018)

The Budget was a fraud based on growth numbers plucked out of the air with very little justification.

If people fall for this cr@p our education system is trash.


----------



## moXJO (9 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The Budget was a fraud based on growth numbers plucked out of the air with very little justification.
> 
> If people fall for this cr@p our education system is trash.



Did you read through the budget already?


----------



## explod (9 May 2018)

The national debt was 300 billion when the libs took over now its near 500 billion.

Jobs and growth jobs and growth jobs and growth jobs and growth, three part time jobs by an individual counted as three jobs in the official stats.

An obvious buy votes budget which in the current difficult climate will hasten their departure from office.


----------



## Humid (9 May 2018)

Let’s abolish penalties and give the big end of town a tax cut blah blah 
Go to a super market anywhere and you will find no extra employees only someone watching you at the self checkout.
The budget is just an extension of their smoke and mirrors trying to get re elected until they can push their flawed big end of town policies.
Let’s compare the Union RC to the banks RC  and don’t forget they set the parameters 

Don’t really effect me either way but wake up and smell the pooh


----------



## SirRumpole (10 May 2018)

More cheap politicking, my way or no way. Morrison is such an arrogant twerp.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-...-morrison-rules-out-tax-bill-carve-up/9744394


----------



## Tisme (10 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> More cheap politicking, my way or no way. Morrison is such an arrogant twerp.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-...-morrison-rules-out-tax-bill-carve-up/9744394




The question starts to be if Morrison is prepared to lose, does he really want it to pass or is the proposed budget a cynical election ploy based on not having to deliver.


----------



## Humid (10 May 2018)

Stopped the boats
Stopped the votes


----------



## SirRumpole (10 May 2018)

Tisme said:


> The question starts to be if Morrison is prepared to lose, does he really want it to pass or is the proposed budget a cynical election ploy based on not having to deliver.




It's a desperate attempt to wedge Labor by forcing them to pass a 7 year plan and if they don't then saying "Labor voted against a tax cut for low and middle income earners".

So yes, the second of your options is correct IMV.


----------



## moXJO (10 May 2018)

Are we not on track to get back to a surplus without Bill S.hittings extra taxes? 

Have any of you read the budget?


----------



## SirRumpole (10 May 2018)

moXJO said:


> Are we not on track to get back to a surplus without Bill S.hittings extra taxes?
> 
> Have any of you read the budget?




No we are not on track because a surplus depends on optimistic assumptions of growth which are currently not being realised and which could all come unstuck if commodity prices fall.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/the...t-is-too-good-to-be-true-20180507-h0zq6y.html


----------



## moXJO (10 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> No we are not on track because a surplus depends on optimistic assumptions of growth which are currently not being realised and which could all come unstuck if commodity prices fall.



Really.
But you throw out that liberals spent more?


----------



## moXJO (10 May 2018)

Another thing I  noticed today. All the news of cfmeu alledged blackmail has disappeared off the google news tab under the same search I did yesterday.


----------



## PZ99 (10 May 2018)

Haven't spent much time reading the budget yet but on the surface it looks fairly responsible.

Can't really pick too many faults to be honest. The infrastructure projects are a no brainer IMO.


----------



## moXJO (10 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Haven't spent much time reading the budget yet but on the surface it looks fairly responsible.
> 
> Can't really pick too many faults to be honest. The infrastructure projects are a no brainer IMO.



Obvious tax bribe, but otherwise pretty safe. Tax break doesn't look like passing,  with One Nation looking to shoot it down.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Haven't spent much time reading the budget yet but on the surface it looks fairly responsible.
> 
> Can't really pick too many faults to be honest. The infrastructure projects are a no brainer IMO.




The question is will the electorate believe the Santa stuff or will they be worried that if the Libs get back they will revert to type and try on the Medicare co-payment stuff again.


----------



## moXJO (10 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The question is will the electorate believe the Santa stuff or will they be worried that if the Libs get back they will revert to type and try on the Medicare co-payment stuff again.



The electorate investigate into the budget even less than you do. They will believe whatever scare campaign is put forward. Unions as we speak, are slugging members for a war chest against libs.

They get labor in and then labor has to abolish the ABCC and another govt department. So they can go on with mafia like activities without repercussions.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 May 2018)

moXJO said:


> The electorate investigate into the budget even less than you do. They will believe whatever scare campaign is put forward. Unions as we speak, are slugging members for a war chest against libs.
> 
> They get labor in and then labor has to abolish the ABCC and another govt department. So they can go on with mafia like activities without repercussions.




I suppose you have read it all have you ?

The Libs run a protection racket for big business and Labor do the same for the unions, that's the way it is.

The Mafia leaders in big business are no better than the union Mafioso, just a lot better paid.


----------



## Humid (10 May 2018)

moXJO said:


> The electorate investigate into the budget even less than you do. They will believe whatever scare campaign is put forward. Unions as we speak, are slugging members for a war chest against libs.
> 
> They get labor in and then labor has to abolish the ABCC and another govt department. So they can go on with mafia like activities without repercussions.




The Fizzer just pays for his own war chest


----------



## PZ99 (10 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The question is will the electorate believe the Santa stuff or will they be worried that if the Libs get back they will revert to type and try on the Medicare co-payment stuff again.



Medicare co-payment is political poison, so we can rule that out. The only skeleton in the 2014 closet that I can remember is the pension age going to 70 which is still their policy today.

This budget to me looks like a deliberate contrast with the ALP's tax policies and sets the tone for the next election IMO. Politics will suddenly get very boring now because it'll be dominated by tax and taxes 

And the ALP are in a lot of sheet at the moment. So the timing's just right.


----------



## SirRumpole (10 May 2018)

PZ99 said:


> This budget to me looks like a deliberate contrast with the ALP's tax policies and sets the tone for the next election IMO. Politics will suddenly get very boring now because it'll be dominated by tax and taxes




I expect that Shorten will outbid the Coalition on tax cuts for low and middle income earners and get some of the edge back. The by elections will tell how both sides are travelling.


----------



## moXJO (10 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I suppose you have read it all have you ?
> 
> The Libs run a protection racket for big business and Labor do the same for the unions, that's the way it is.
> 
> The Mafia leaders in big business are no better than the union Mafioso, just a lot better paid.



I haven't condemned it, or championed it without reading it.


----------



## moXJO (10 May 2018)

Humid said:


> The Fizzer just pays for his own war chest



Yes backs his vision with his own money. Not handouts ripped from union members to back an agenda.


----------



## Humid (10 May 2018)

Slugging.....ripped.....someone certainly has an agenda!


----------



## Humid (10 May 2018)

The only vision the Libs have is division


----------



## moXJO (10 May 2018)

Humid said:


> Slugging.....ripped.....someone certainly has an agenda!



Yeah truth.


----------



## PZ99 (11 May 2018)

Here you go people > TAX+TAX÷TAXxTAX÷TAX÷[URL='http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/labor-promises-bigger-tax-cuts-for-workers/news-story/dbc64304470c4f34a3657bd2038d92a5']TAX-TAX = [URL='http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/labor-promises-bigger-tax-cuts-for-workers/news-story/dbc64304470c4f34a3657bd2038d92a5']TAX[/URL][/URL]


----------



## Tisme (11 May 2018)

moXJO said:


> Yes backs his vision with his own money. Not handouts ripped from union members to back an agenda.





Buying his own preselection?


----------



## moXJO (11 May 2018)

Tisme said:


> Buying his own preselection?



Another way you could look at it.

Don't take my defense as a liberal endorsement.
I won't vote for them, as they are possibly the worst government to encroach on peoples freedom's. The seem to want to get their grubby little fingers in everyone's business. And have destroyed privacy. 
Snooping in peoples phones, computers, bank accounts, making cash dissappear,  etc. Basically turning totalitarian imo. 

The right to privacy is gone. And their push for digital cash just makes it easier for them to take your money. 

Turnbull sprouting the old liberal mantra of "Government should keep out of your business" seems laughable under his rule. Freedom is being destroyed.

But given a choice between the budgets at this moment I'd lean lib.


----------



## Tisme (12 May 2018)

moXJO said:


> Another way you could look at it.
> 
> Don't take my defense as a liberal endorsement.
> I won't vote for them, as they are possibly the worst government to encroach on peoples freedom's. The seem to want to get their grubby little fingers in everyone's business. And have destroyed privacy.
> ...




He's like a Marxist wearing a blue riband.

His whimpering endorsement and dead hand with the NBN at Abbott's instruction was a tipping point for me. He should have stood up and been counted on to LNP rebrand it, but push the original idea through.


----------



## moXJO (12 May 2018)

Tisme said:


> He should have stood up and been counted on to LNP rebrand it, but push the original idea through.



Agree.

Why spend all that money for a half assed product that won't age well.

Some policy and direction I agree with and other policy I hate. 
But realistically its either lab or lib.

 Not to mention the new brand of lefty snowflakes give me the shi.ts. So leaning right atm.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 May 2018)

moXJO said:


> Not to mention the new brand of lefty snowflakes give me the shi.ts. So leaning right atm.




No doubt that Labor have gone soft as far as personnel is concerned. Social inclusion by quota is now their game and its not working as the appointment of Nova Peris showed.

They are missing out on talent. There  are few Hawkes or Keatings or Tanners in the ranks but I'd still rank them over muppets like Morrison, Pyne and Dutton.

The Libs have had their day I reckon. The farce over the RC into banks, the pathetic NBN delivery, the tax plan that will give massive benefits to the high end who don't need it and don't deserve it, protection of tax avoidance schemes like NG, capital gains, family trusts etc shows that their focus is on the upper end of the income stream while the majority get a few crumbs.

They had their chance and they blew it. Good riddance to them (I hope).


----------



## Triathlete (12 May 2018)

Since the budget it seems that both sides will be battling it out in regards to how fair and how much should the Tax cuts be for individuals and whether businesses need further tax cuts so hopefully they take a few things into consideration........

This is an old one but appropriate:

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100…

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this…

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7..
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do..

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.

“Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20”. Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.

So the first four men were unaffected.

They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men?

The paying customers?

How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realised that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).

The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).

The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

“I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving,” declared the sixth man.

He pointed to the tenth man,”but he got $10!”

“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!”

“That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “we didn’t get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important.

They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works.

The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction.

Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore.

In fact, *they might start drinking overseas*, (where have our jobs gone) where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

ANONYMOUS


----------



## sptrawler (14 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> No doubt that Labor have gone soft as far as personnel is concerned. Social inclusion by quota is now their game and its not working as the appointment of Nova Peris showed.
> 
> They are missing out on talent. There  are few Hawkes or Keatings or Tanners in the ranks but I'd still rank them over muppets like Morrison, Pyne and Dutton.
> 
> ...




Yep, then when that is all spent, who do you hit next? Those who have done fluck all. lol


----------



## Humid (16 May 2018)

moXJO said:


> Another thing I  noticed today. All the news of cfmeu alledged blackmail has disappeared off the google news tab under the same search I did yesterday.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-...-construction-union-bosses-dropped-by/9766648

Pulled over with his family on a blackmail charge
Seriously what has this place become?


----------



## Humid (16 May 2018)

Do you think this Sunday someone from AMP or the major banks will be pulled over by the cops in the city?
Mrs and kids in the car,arrested and taken to the cop shop and charged!
We’ll reserve that for blue collar people
Dogs the lot of them


----------



## Tisme (16 May 2018)

Humid said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-...-construction-union-bosses-dropped-by/9766648
> 
> Pulled over with his family on a blackmail charge
> Seriously what has this place become?




As if executives of Boral would meet their nemesis and not record the conversation or have someone in the room with them as witness. Boral might find themselves having to answer the notion they were the ones who tried to stitch up the union by encouraging a conversation that alluded to blackmail.


----------



## moXJO (16 May 2018)

Humid said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-...-construction-union-bosses-dropped-by/9766648
> 
> Pulled over with his family on a blackmail charge
> Seriously what has this place become?



Someone was leaned on.....


----------



## SirRumpole (26 May 2018)

This just shows what a duplicitous government we have.



https://www.theguardian.com/austral...cism-of-murray-darling-basin-plan-from-report


----------



## moXJO (26 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> This just shows what a duplicitous government we have.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/austral...cism-of-murray-darling-basin-plan-from-report




Ag response  to Grafton.

http://www.agriculture.gov.au/about/media-centre/on-the-record/response-professor-grafton


I call another bs article from the Guardian. Which just alludes that something corrupt may have happened.
How about some  sources. The UN is a waste of space as well.


To save me typing:

Converting hundreds of kilometres of wide open water channels to water pipes does not save water? Each square meter of open water channel loses ~2metres of water each year to evaporation, plus soil seepage. No evaporation or seepage with water pipes. Can't imagine why they didn't include that detail in the story. Maybe the absurdity of suggesting that converting open water channels to water pipes produces negative outcomes.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 May 2018)

moXJO said:


> Ag response  to Grafton.
> 
> http://www.agriculture.gov.au/about/media-centre/on-the-record/response-professor-grafton
> 
> ...




The Ag Department is controlled by the government.

Would you expect anything else but a whitewash ? 

A body with no skin in the game is likely to be the most unbiased.


----------



## moXJO (26 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The Ag Department is controlled by the government.
> 
> Would you expect anything else but a whitewash ?
> 
> A body with no skin in the game is likely to be the most unbiased.



UN back flipped pretty easy so whats the story.


----------



## SirRumpole (26 May 2018)

moXJO said:


> UN back flipped pretty easy so whats the story.




If the Gov threatened to cut payments to the UN if they didn't then that's intimidation, if they promised to give more money then that's bribery.


----------



## moXJO (26 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> If the Gov threatened to cut payments to the UN if they didn't then that's intimidation, if they promised to give more money then that's bribery.



Or they backed it up with results. Or they all had  a UN orgy. Or..... we don't really know.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 May 2018)

Another Muppet Minister...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-30/michaelia-cash-ordered-to-give-evidence-in-awu-case/9815282


----------



## Tisme (31 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Another Muppet Minister...
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-30/michaelia-cash-ordered-to-give-evidence-in-awu-case/9815282




I hope that shrill gets what's coming to her. There's something very unedifying about elected representatives who think their 50% voter approval gives them the right to display their infantile spit and vitriol to the other 50% they are supposed to also represent once a bum on seat.

She's one of those post Menzies, post born to rule Liberals who have been raised on a diet of hate for the labour class , because they think it's unfair the individual should have to compete with the synergy and undeserved wages of the collective.....which is strange because division of labour and factory systems were a capitalist invention.


----------



## Tisme (1 June 2018)

I'll just put this here to remind everyone what a real leader (love him or hate him) looks like:


----------



## SirRumpole (1 June 2018)

Tisme said:


> I'll just put this here to remind everyone what a real leader (love him or hate him) looks like:
> 
> View attachment 87610




Yep, he was thrown out too soon and we got 11 years of nothing.


----------



## Tisme (4 June 2018)

Govt debt $530 billion now.


----------



## PZ99 (4 June 2018)

Not all bad in context. Net debt to GDP around the same as 1995-96.

Plus we have around $150b in future funds.

But if a recession hits we're buggered


----------



## Tisme (5 June 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Not all bad in context.




In the context the LNP was elected on the back of messianic economic management and budget repair of big black holes ....... fail


----------



## SirRumpole (5 June 2018)

Tisme said:


> In the context the LNP was elected on the back of messianic economic management and budget repair of big black holes ....... fail




Yeah, but it's all Shorten's fault.


----------



## Tisme (5 June 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Yeah, but it's all Shorten's fault.




Lab ahead by 8 points now, goddammit! It'll be a parliament of emasculated males and wounded misandrist women..... no wonder the LNP is trying to stack its preselections with male candidates who might provide a belated antidote to the nanny state they helped grow.


----------



## PZ99 (5 June 2018)

The real fail was the theory that budget austerity would save us all.

If I had a choice between more deficits or austere measures such as being fined $7 for being sick and having 3 years of retirement confiscated I'll take the deficits anytime.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 June 2018)

Tisme said:


> Lab ahead by 8 points now, goddammit! It'll be a parliament of emasculated males and wounded misandrist women..... no wonder the LNP is trying to stack its preselections with male candidates who might provide a belated antidote to the nanny state they helped grow.




I heard that the by election polls were swinging towards the Libs.


----------



## Tisme (5 June 2018)

PZ99 said:


> The real fail was the theory that budget austerity would save us all.
> 
> If I had a choice between more deficits or austere measures such as being fined $7 for being sick and having 3 years of retirement confiscated I'll take the deficits anytime.




That was big stick policy, when we had to be punished for allowing Labor to rule in the first place. The fear of revived retribution by the LNP will ensure the actual polls are closer than the opinion polls.

Let's hope the ALP don't restart their unbridled desire to right the wrongs by ramshackle spending and thinking they can e.g. use private enterprise project managers and state govts to funnel monies to infrastructure spend and expect more than 50% actually get to the coal face.


----------



## SirRumpole (6 June 2018)

In respect of the new data retention laws, anyone who says data is secure is a liar.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-...p-hacked-with-client-data-compromised/9840048


----------



## sptrawler (7 June 2018)

Tisme said:


> I'll just put this here to remind everyone what a real leader (love him or hate him) looks like:
> 
> View attachment 87610




Yes the leader who floated the dollar, which dropped its value from $1.20 U.S to 50 cents in a short period of time.
This was good for exports and business, but wasn't so good for working families, as everything they bought went up.
But that wasn't all, because he knew there would be a massive worker backlash, he brought in the wages accord.
This enabled the Government and Unions to effectively stop strikes for wage rises, by linking it to CPI, which ended up being a double whammy.
Real wages dropped by 18% under the accord, and buying power dropped massively, due to devaluation.
But hey, lets not let get out of shape, praise the mystro.
Funny how everyone sees history differently.
I must admit, he was a master of sarcasm and the English language.


----------



## PZ99 (7 June 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Yes the leader who floated the dollar, which dropped its value from $1.20 U.S to 50 cents in a short period of time.
> This was good for exports and business, but wasn't so good for working families, as everything they bought went up.
> But that wasn't all, because he knew there would be a massive worker backlash, he brought in the wages accord.
> This enabled the Government and Unions to effectively stop strikes for wage rises, by linking it to CPI, which ended up being a double whammy.
> ...



Oh boy.... hell awaits thee for that post. LOL

Without the accord the popcorn would've been 50 bucks a bucket


----------



## Tisme (7 June 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Yes the leader who floated the dollar, which dropped its value from $1.20 U.S to 50 cents in a short period of time.
> This was good for exports and business, but wasn't so good for working families, as everything they bought went up.
> But that wasn't all, because he knew there would be a massive worker backlash, he brought in the wages accord.
> This enabled the Government and Unions to effectively stop strikes for wage rises, by linking it to CPI, which ended up being a double whammy.
> ...




As I stated ... you can love him or hate him, innate leadership is not defined by trivial pursuits.


----------



## explod (11 June 2018)

Behind Turnbull's "Jobs and Growth" mantra.  From The Aim network today:-

"
By Michael Griffin ©

Despite the 403,000 ‘new jobs’ that Turnbull and his employment minister, Michaelia Cash, claim to have created over 2017, over that same period the unemployment rate fell by only 0.1% from 5.6% to 5.5%. On the face of it, that seems an odd phenomenon.


The 403,000 jobs Turnbull claims to have created during the course of 2017 is approximately 50% of the number of unemployed. On that basis, any ordinary person would be forgiven for expecting that such a huge number of ‘new jobs’ would put a very significant dent in the unemployment numbers.

No doubt, that same ordinary person would be equally surprised to find that it hadn’t. It stands to reason that if all the jobs Turnbull claims to have created had gone to an unemployed Australian, then the unemployment rate, and the public costs of Newstart, and of the homelessness that results from unemployment, would have been at least halved.

So what is really happening here?

As indicated by an article by Tim Colebatch in _Inside Story_ on 20 April 2018, the reason the jobs growth touted by Turnbull had no impact on the jobless figures for the corresponding period is because nearly 73% of the so-called ‘new jobs’ Turnbull claims to have created went to new migrants.

As Colebatch’s linked article indicates, hidden within a recently released joint report of the Treasury and Department of Home Affairs Offices entitled ‘_Shaping the Nation_ (2018)’, which the title itself implies the deliberate adoption of a strategic policy of social engineering akin to that suggested by the Club of Rome and by neo-liberal globalists, that would alarm many conspiracy theorists and nationalists, and which report seems to have been conveniently ‘missed’ by the  great Australian professional media, is this:

_“Recent migrants accounted for two thirds (64.5%) of the approximately 850,000 net jobs created in the past five years. For full-time employment, the impact is even more pronounced, with recent migrants accounting for 72.4 percent of new jobs created.”_

Hence, not much more than one-quarter of all the jobs Turnbull claims to have created have gone to Australian citizens, in particular, to the unemployed. The remaining nearly three-quarters of jobs created have gone to migrants on a working visa of some sort.

The fact that the jobs created have largely been taken by migrants partly explains why the official unemployment rate dropped by only 0.1% during the same period that Turnbull and Cash claim the increased job numbers occurred.

This discrepancy occurs because the migrants taking the jobs would not have been receiving Newstart before they took up their new job in Australia and, hence, would not have been included in the unemployment figures before or after they started working.

Put simply, they would not have been registered as unemployed before they got their new Australian job because they would not have been in Australia when the jobless figures were tallied. Consequently, when they arrive in Australia and start their new job, their employment is not deducted against the jobless figure.

Amongst other things, these facts indicate that Turnbull and his LNP government cannot legitimately use jobs growth numbers to justify their continuing persecution of the unemployed. Indeed, the facts probably support the opposite. That is, that the LNP’s ongoing persecution of the unemployed is unreasonable because it is government policy, in permitting so many work visa migrants into Australia, that has caused, and is still causing, the plight of the unemployed in Australia.

In other words, the government is to blame for unemployment NOT the individual unemployed person who is, in reality, a victim of the LNP’s anti-Australian, pro-immigrant ‘(re)shaping the nation’ policy.

But there is another factor relevant to why the official long-term unemployment rate was barely impacted upon by the ‘new jobs’ Turnbull and Cash claim to have created and which factor is not so evident from the _Shaping the Nation_ report and that Tim Colebatch does not mention.

Reviewing the Australian Bureau of Statistics (‘ABS’) Labour statistics pages, upon which Turnbull and Cash rely to make their jobs growth claims, then we learn that the ABS does not measure ‘full-time jobs’ at all but measures only ‘working hours’.

The ABS defines a ‘job’, for the purpose of job creation statistics, to include any increased hour of work for those already employed. Hence, when a worker undertakes additional hours in the form of overtime, for instance, or when a casual or part-time employee works a few extra hours, then each of the additional hours worked is included as a new and separately created ‘job’ in the ABS statistics.

Hence, six additional hours of work by the same person undertaking the tasks they usually do in their usual job is counted as six brand new jobs. This is the case even if the same person is working for the same employer, in the same workplace and is undertaking the same tasks they do in their ordinary or usual work hours. The only difference is that the same person is working a few additional hours more than they did at the time the ABS measured working hours in the previous year.

The ABS relies upon international standards to measure ‘hours of work’ as separate jobs in the way it does. ‘Resolution I’ of The 18th International Conference of Labour Statisticians concerns the measurement of working time. It states the following:


_“Working time can be measured for short measurement units, such as minutes or hours, or for long units such as half-days, days, weeks or months. The measurement unit of “hours” is used for ease of reference.”_
The ABS has chosen the ‘ease of reference approach’ by using an hour as the unit of measurement for the creation of a ‘job’. To that effect, the ABS reports that those interviewed in their job creation survey for 2017 responded that they were working on average 0.6% more hours than those interviewed for the corresponding survey at the same time in 2016.

The ABS then extrapolates the percentage of additional hours worked by those in its limited survey sample to the Australian workforce as a whole and it then calculates the total ‘new jobs’ created from the figure arrived at after the process of extrapolation to the entire workforce.

Hence, the ABS assumes that, like those employees in their limited survey, every worker in Australia has also worked 0.6% more hours than they did in the previous year and, in this instance, it arrives at the conclusion that 403,000 additional working hours, and, hence, 403,000 ‘new jobs’, have been created across the entire economy during that period.

In sum, what Turnbull’s 403,000 ‘new jobs’ really means is that 403,000 more hours have been worked than the last time a measurement was taken by the ABS. However, because each additional single hour worked is regarded as a ‘new job’, Turnbull and Cash are able to claim that the 403,000 additional hours worked is also 403,000 ‘new jobs’.

What has been created then by Turnbull is actually 403,000 additional hours of work, not 403,000 new full-time jobs as Turnbull would like us all to believe. In fact, if the additional 403,000 working hours is divided by the average weekly full-time hours of 37.5 hrs, then it calculates that for the period for which he and Cash boast of creating 403,000 ‘new jobs’, they have actually only created the equivalent of approximately 10,747 full-time jobs.

Applying the percentages disclosed in _Shaping the Nation_, then we can see that, of those 10,747 equivalent full-time jobs, about 73 %, or 8,060 equivalent full-time jobs, were worked by migrants on visa and the bulk of the rest of the equivalent full-time jobs by existing employees spread across the nation. All the additional 0.6% hours worked by existing employees across the nation provide the other working hours, which, when tallied together and then divided by 37.5 hrs, make up the remaining equivalent full-time jobs not worked by migrants on a visa.    

Significantly, neither of these groups – migrants or existing employees – were included in the previous jobless figures because they were either employed or not in Australia at all when the jobless figures were measured in 2016 or 2017. Because they were not previously included in the jobless figures, the additional working hours undertaken by migrants or by existing employees had no effective impact on the unemployment rate during the corresponding period and, consequently, that rate fell by only 0.1 %.

This also means that few unemployed people benefited from migrants getting an Australian job, or from existing workers undertaking additional work, during the period that the measurements were taken.

These figures also indicate that the cost of unemployment is not ameliorated when migrants on visa take an Australian job. If the 403,000 ‘jobs’ Turnbull claims to have been created had gone to an unemployed Australian, then approximately half the annual amount spent on Newstart, or about $5 billion per annum, would have been saved to be freed up for spending in other areas or for debt reduction.

Seems that Turnbull is committed to the use of rubbery figures and statistics to create a false picture of reality. By doing so he can conveniently use these rubbery statistics for the generation of his fake news on job creation, to justify his ongoing victimisation of the unemployed, for his ongoing deception of the Australian people about his government’s economic credentials and as a dubious reason for his implementation of discredited trickle-down neo-liberal economic policies and for his advocacy for the maintenance of a failing capitalist market system – a system that can provide neither sufficient jobs nor adequate housing for the citizens of the nation in which it operates."


----------



## SirRumpole (11 June 2018)

explod said:


> Despite the 403,000 ‘new jobs’ that Turnbull and his employment minister, Michaelia Cash, claim to have created over 2017, over that same period the unemployment rate fell by only 0.1% from 5.6% to 5.5%. On the face of it, that seems an odd phenomenon.




Very revealing plod.

If true it means that the job figures are a con, just as the unemployment figures are, with the working of one hour a week considered "employed".

What the real figures are is anyone's guess.


----------



## sptrawler (12 June 2018)

Maybe it could be due to jobs being lost, as in the car industry. 
If 400,000 new jobs are created, and 350,000 existing jobs are lost, the net gain isn't a lot.
If 350,000 existing jobs are lost and no new jobs are created, the net loss is 750,000, that's a lot.


----------



## Tisme (12 June 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Maybe it could be due to jobs being lost, as in the car industry.
> If 400,000 new jobs are created, and 350,000 existing jobs are lost, the net gain isn't a lot.
> If 350,000 existing jobs are lost and no new jobs are created, the net loss is 750,000, that's a lot.



http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/0/F85715A234DAAD86CA258234000C173C?Opendocument


----------



## sptrawler (12 June 2018)

Tisme said:


> http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/0/F85715A234DAAD86CA258234000C173C?Opendocument




Yes like I said it is only showing net gains or loses, it doesn't show the sectors that are gaining and or losing jobs.


----------



## sptrawler (17 June 2018)

This female reporter, nails it, in an ABC article.
*Politics viewed as an elite sport*
_Politics is speaking a language that isn't resonating. Talk is focused on a worldview that isn't aligning with how real people see the world they're challenged by. But they can't express themselves because someone somewhere will decide to be offended.

Politics is increasingly being viewed as little more than an elite sport, a pastime with a juicy expenses account that enables a luxurious lifestyle rather than actually having to work.

It has drifted away in a bubble and is removed from the daily reality of debt and crippling lack of hope that many are grappling with._

The article is here.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-...own-australian-politics-major-parties/9874478


----------



## Smurf1976 (17 June 2018)

sptrawler said:


> _It has drifted away in a bubble and is removed from the daily reality_



Very true.

The last decent PM we had was Keating in my view. Everyone since has ranged from short term populism through to downright useless.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 June 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> Very true.
> 
> The last decent PM we had was Keating in my view. Everyone since has ranged from short term populism through to downright useless.




Keating didn't have a university education clogging up his brains and the mystique of a smart ar$ed city lawyer feeding his ego.

He got where he did by hard work not, not the generosity of mates in high places.


----------



## sptrawler (17 June 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Keating didn't have a university education clogging up his brains and the mystique of a smart ar$ed city lawyer feeding his ego.
> 
> He got where he did by hard work not, not the generosity of mates in high places.




It didn't take a university degree, back then, to have the populace believe in you.

There wasn't the internet, if Keating was in parliament now, the media would tear him to bits, it would be a piranha field day.

The 24/7 media would have a field day.

He didn't have to put up with the $hit, that the media throws out every day, and have a population that eats it up like McDonalds jumbo burgers with fries.
Today you read it on the SMH, tommorrow it's regurgitated, on social media.
It would be really nice, if the plebs actually thought through the content, and developed their own prognosis, but today it is copy and paste unfortunately.

When Keating was in, the press had manners and the populace believed the politicians had honour.
Now both lines are smudged, to the point, of being unidentifiable.


----------



## Smurf1976 (17 June 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Keating didn't have a university education clogging up his brains and the mystique of a smart ar$ed city lawyer feeding his ego.




I do see value in education but I also think we've reached a point where we're sending people to university for the sake of it rather than training them with skills they'll actually use.

Make a factual statement on any subject and these days most will respond with "who told you that?" or "where did you hear that?" etc. Everything needs to be attributable to someone else to cover your own rear end it seems. The idea that you yourself might actually know all about the subject and are the original source of the statement and analysis behind is a concept many just don't comprehend and yet we've supposedly got the most highly educated population we've ever had.


----------



## sptrawler (17 June 2018)

Politics now is about, saying nothing, while trying to do something.
While appeasing those who do nothing, wanting everything.
At the same time, those who do something have to work harder, to pay for it.

The whole system has become out of balance, with political correctness.


----------



## Tisme (18 June 2018)

sptrawler said:


> It didn't take a university degree, back then, to have the populace believe in you.
> 
> There wasn't the internet, if Keating was in parliament now, the media would tear him to bits, it would be a piranha field day.
> 
> ...




Keating is still like Kit Walker, when he speaks the whole jungle shakes, including the media. Unlike others he is still willing to back himself in and take the fight up to those who disagree.


----------



## sptrawler (19 June 2018)

Tisme said:


> Keating is still like Kit Walker, when he speaks the whole jungle shakes, including the media. Unlike others he is still willing to back himself in and take the fight up to those who disagree.




It just shows what a Statesman can do, with the power of a sharp brain and an equally sharp wit.
Twenty years on, none want to take it on, in unarmed combat. LOL

Like you said you have to respect him, like him, or not.

We could certainly do with one now to tell, Malcolm and Bill, to shut up, sit down and listen.
This is what needs to be done.

They both know what needs to be done, but neither has the ability or conviction to sell it.

So instead of driving ourselves out of the doldrums, we sit back and wait for the global economy to do it, which as normal will mean we are five years behind. LOL


----------



## IFocus (26 June 2018)

So who is going to pay for the tax cuts.......anyone


----------



## PZ99 (26 June 2018)

IFocus said:


> So who is going to pay for the tax cuts.......anyone



Future generations for sure. All up it's nearly the equivalent of our entire future fund.

I could make a fortune collecting all these cans getting kicked down the road.


----------



## Tisme (26 June 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Future generations for sure. ....




Them or Huawei


----------



## HelloU (26 June 2018)

Nobody pays for for revenue that is not accrued.

I ask people, if the government had $1 in more in tax money could they find someone who is willing to use it for some purpose?.......what if I gave them another $1 in tax, could they find a use for it.....what about another $1 - could they find a use for that as well......what about another $1......and another..

Where is the point at which there is nowhere left to spend these additional tax dollars?  

I tend to think that before we get to that point the government has already taken my entire income as tax, so I now have my hand out to get some welfare.


----------



## PZ99 (26 June 2018)

Tisme said:


> Them or Huawei



Gloria and George


----------



## Tisme (26 June 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Gloria and George




Divine providence


----------



## IFocus (26 June 2018)

HelloU said:


> Nobody pays for for revenue that is not accrued.
> 
> I ask people, if the government had $1 in more in tax money could they find someone who is willing to use it for some purpose?.......what if I gave them another $1 in tax, could they find a use for it.....what about another $1 - could they find a use for that as well......what about another $1......and another..
> 
> ...




Understand your point/theory.

Howard / Costello brought elections with giveaways during a revenue boom and left a permanent revenue deficit.

These tax cuts are touted as reform (not) are these tax cuts the same as no areas of savings have been mentioned?

Or is it just another US style Republican backdoor move to reduce services to balance future budgets?


----------



## Smurf1976 (26 June 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Future generations for sure. All up it's nearly the equivalent of our entire future fund.




Hence my long held view that to the extent governments are going to have assets, and I do think that's wise within reason, they should take the form of physical things like roads, railways, ports, dams, power stations, schools, owning their own office buildings and so on and should never be in the form of liquid financial assets which are far too easily sold off without public scrutiny.


----------



## Humid (29 June 2018)

As of July 1

*Penalty rate changes*
*Sunday penalty rates* in the fast food, hospitality, pharmacy and retail industries are changing, following a Fair Work Commission decision last year. 

Full -time and part-time* hospitality* *workers* will have penalty rates decrease by 10 per cent while causal employees will continue to get the same rate.

*Retail workers* will drop by 15 per cent with an extra 5 per cent decrease for casual workers.

*Pharmacy employees'* penalty rates will drop by 15 per cent and 10 per cent for *fast food employees*.

What an achievement


----------



## Tisme (29 June 2018)

Humid said:


> As of July 1
> 
> *Penalty rate changes*
> *Sunday penalty rates* in the fast food, hospitality, pharmacy and retail industries are changing, following a Fair Work Commission decision last year.
> ...





Creating an under class


----------



## PZ99 (29 June 2018)

We can thank Tory Tony for that. I can't vote Liberal with him there.


----------



## sptrawler (29 June 2018)

PZ99 said:


> We can thank Tory Tony for that. I can't vote Liberal with him there.




I doubt you could vote Liberal, no matter who was there, but that is only my perception.
Maybe Silly Billy, would have been better served, saying he would repeal the penalty rate ruling.
Rather than hitting, the small business, that employs them.
He never mentioned giving the roll back of the tax, to those who lost their weekend penalties.


----------



## sptrawler (29 June 2018)

PZ99 said:


> We can thank Tory Tony for that. I can't vote Liberal with him there.



It took a while but here is Silly Billy's response to the "fair work commissions ruling on weekend penalties".

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-23/weekend-penalty-rates-fair-work-commission-decision/8295758

Billy's response to it from the above article, from the favoured ABC:

*Labor to challenge Fair Work decision*
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten said workers had been "kicked in the guts".

"We are going to do our best to convince the Fair Work Commission not to implement this decision," he said.

"If we are unsuccessful, we will also be changing the law in Parliament to change the rules that the Fair Work Commission operate under.

"I have never seen an argument which would justify wholesale pay cuts for the lowest paid workers in Australia."


It is a shame Billy has to change his policy, to change with his principles, no one knows what he will decide is on his hit list tomorrow. IMO

Funny how Abbott, said what he stood for and was shot down, now we have Shorten with more moves than a Swiss watch and no one takes him to task.
Bloody deplorable. IMO

If he does get in, there will be a lot of people with their hands out. LOL


----------



## luutzu (29 June 2018)

Tisme said:


> Creating an under class




Carrot and sticks. Both at once.


----------



## Humid (30 June 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I doubt you could vote Liberal, no matter who was there, but that is only my perception.
> Maybe Silly Billy, would have been better served, saying he would repeal the penalty rate ruling.
> Rather than hitting, the small business, that employs them.
> He never mentioned giving the roll back of the tax, to those who lost their weekend penalties.




And vise versa considering the thread is about the fizzers government you do some serious Labor bashing


----------



## PZ99 (30 June 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I doubt you could vote Liberal, no matter who was there, but that is only my perception.
> Maybe Silly Billy, would have been better served, saying he would repeal the penalty rate ruling.
> Rather than hitting, the small business, that employs them.
> He never mentioned giving the roll back of the tax, to those who lost their weekend penalties.



Prior to 2007, I had voted Liberal more than Labor. That all changed when they had control of the senate and started taking away penalty rates (workchoices) without taking it to an election.

This time Abbott did it by proxy via fairwork. Both times were dishonest.

I don't rule out voting for Turnbull over Shorten but it won't happen if the penalty rates aren't replenished. Liberal supporters need to understand that there are times when you just have to look after number one. And when number one means paying exorbitant rent and putting food on the table it becomes a no brainer. Taking money off workers isn't Government. It's economic stupidity bordering on legalised wage theft.

Tax cuts for small business is the way to go and I've been advocating that from the start.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 June 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Tax cuts for small business is the way to go and I've been advocating that from the start.




Funny how neither side wants to talk about abolishing the most iniquitous tax imposed on business, ie payroll tax. It's a tax on employment and should have been eradicated years ago when the GST came in. 

The Feds should take the States on in getting rid of this tax, those States that want to keep it should get a cut in Federal money.


----------



## Smurf1976 (30 June 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Prior to 2007, I had voted Liberal more than Labor.



Late last century I very nearly gave politics a shot and had I done so it would have been with the Liberals.

Long story short there’s no way I’d vote for them these days. That is by no means a personal gripe or falling out but I’ve simply seen too much to even contemplate it.

I have no faith in any of them really but Labor is the only piece of wood that might have even the slightest bit of strength amongst the pile of sawdust that is Australian politics in 2018.

It’ll take a full blown crisis to fix it.


----------



## Tisme (23 July 2018)

While you were sleeping, the govt has been busy removing your rights to strike and protest without fear of shoot to kill. LNP are not libertarians

https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.c...-allow-the-use-of-military-to-break-protests/


----------



## SirRumpole (28 July 2018)

Big swings to Labor in four by elections.

Turnbull must be getting worried now.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-...y-results-leaves-coalition-questions/10047548


----------



## PZ99 (29 July 2018)

Well done Mark Latham - you tool


----------



## sptrawler (29 July 2018)

I must congratulate Silly Billy, he has touched the heart strings of the electorate, to accept that welfare is the norm and those aspiring for better are capitalist pigs. lol
Can't wait to see the outcome of three years of Billy. OMG 

After three years, people will see, how the changes effect them. It should be good viewing.


----------



## moXJO (29 July 2018)

Been over a hundred years since a sitting government won a seat from opposition  in a by-election.

And there was no danger at all of them wining one now. 

Libs have pssed off all the wrong voters while they have been patting themselves on the back and throwing  high fives. They better get their house in order or they are in for a rude shock.


----------



## sptrawler (29 July 2018)

moXJO said:


> Been over a hundred years since a sitting government won a seat from opposition  in a by-election.
> 
> And there was no danger at all of them wining one now.
> 
> Libs have pssed off all the wrong voters while they have been patting themselves on the back and throwing  high fives. They better get their house in order or they are in for a rude shock.



When they put Turnbull in, they lined themselves up for a rude shock.


----------



## Tisme (30 July 2018)

When a govt encourages it's male navy personnel to paint their finger nails pink to promote gender diversity, it's time to think about gun ownership.


----------



## basilio (30 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> When a govt encourages it's male navy personnel to paint their finger nails pink to promote gender diversity, it's time to think about gun ownership.




Perhaps it's worth having a listen to the Head of the the Defence Forces views on gender equity in the Armed Forces rather than the Mark Lathams of this world.

*Defence Force chief promotes gender diversity as crucial to Australia's military capability*
By Defence reporter Andrew Greene
Updated 5 Apr 2017, 5:04pm

Sorry, this video has expired
*Video:* Mark Binskin praised the Navy for promoting women to leadership roles. (ABC News) 
A gathering of women who work in defence and national security has been told their participation in the traditionally male-dominated sector is crucial to Australia's military capability.

*Women in the ADF:*

16.1% of permanent, full-time ADF personnel are women
266 women are serving overseas on ADF operations (about 14p% of the total deployed force)
82 women are in senior officer positions (compared with 48 in February 2012)
41p% of Department of Defence public servants are women
More than 40% of those in Defence graduate program are women
43% of appointments in most recent recruitments for Defence senior executive positions were women (compared with about 30% in existing senior executive cohort)


Addressing the inaugural Women and National Security Conference in Canberra today, Defence chief, Air Chief Marshal Mark Binskin, stressed the importance of a diverse workforce for the ADF.

"A diverse workforce is all about capability. The greater our diversity, the greater the range of ideas and insights to challenge the accepted norm, assess the risks, see them from a different perspective, and develop creative solutions," he said.

"I've seen this on operations but I also see it every day in my own office.

"Right now 57 per cent of my personal staff are women. This is no mistake. In fact, I hand choose everyone for that office.

"They are the first to tell me how it really is in their candour on behalf of their peers and the networks that they represent.

"Combined with the mix of unique insights, [it] helps me see issues from a different point of view, and in my experiences, our differences make a stronger team."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-...rsity-crucial-for-military-capability/8419022


----------



## Tisme (30 July 2018)

basilio said:


> Perhaps it's worth having a listen to the Head of the the Defence Forces views on gender equity in the Armed Forces rather than the Mark Lathams of this world.
> 
> *Defence Force chief promotes gender diversity as crucial to Australia's military capability*
> By Defence reporter Andrew Greene
> ...




Like I said ... might renew my licence and arsenal ... that should double the repelling force in defence of our country ....what's left of it.


----------



## moXJO (30 July 2018)

basilio said:


> Perhaps it's worth having a listen to the Head of the the Defence Forces views on gender equity in the Armed Forces rather than the Mark Lathams of this world.
> 
> *Defence Force chief promotes gender diversity as crucial to Australia's military capability*
> By Defence reporter Andrew Greene
> ...




Women weaken combat units.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 July 2018)

If you have an all male office or an all women office, things will get done even if they are the wrong things.

If you mix them up they will be forever arguing and little will get done because men and women think differently, that's a scientific fact.

This is probably the wrong thread for this, but it follows on from previous posts.


----------



## basilio (30 July 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> If you have an all male office or an all women office, things will get done even if they are the wrong things.
> 
> If you mix them up they will be forever arguing and little will get done because men and women think differently, that's a scientific fact.
> .




So you wern't so impressed with the experience of the Defence Chief with regard to the improvement a diverse range of views can offer ?

_"A diverse workforce is all about capability. The greater our diversity, the greater the range of ideas and insights to challenge the accepted norm, assess the risks, see them from a different perspective, and develop creative solutions," he said.

"I've seen this on operations but I also see it every day in my own office.

"Right now 57 per cent of my personal staff are women. This is no mistake. In fact, I hand choose everyone for that office.

"They are the first to tell me how it really is in their candour on behalf of their peers and the networks that they represent.

"Combined with the mix of unique insights, [it] helps me see issues from a different point of view, and in my experiences, our differences make a stronger team."_


----------



## Tisme (30 July 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> If you have an all male office or an all women office, things will get done even if they are the wrong things.
> 
> If you mix them up they will be forever arguing and little will get done because men and women think differently, that's a scientific fact.
> 
> This is probably the wrong thread for this, but it follows on from previous posts.




I think you have to factor in the pink nail polish ... it screams high functioning soldier.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 July 2018)

basilio said:


> So you wern't so impressed with the experience of the Defence Chief with regard to the improvement a diverse range of views can offer ?




When you have to make split second decisions you haven't got time to sit around and discuss "diverse views".

They may be ok for day to day admin tasks, but in high pressure situations I would be trusting a single commander with experience.


----------



## Tisme (30 July 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> When you have to make split second decisions you haven't got time to sit around and discuss "diverse views".
> 
> They may be ok for day to day admin tasks, but in high pressure situations I would be trusting a single commander with experience.




Settling for second best to defend your family, your safety, your country:

"
*No place for women in the SAS, says ex-special forces member training them*
*WOMEN should not be allowed to join the SAS, an ex-special forces hero has said.*
By CONSTANCE KNOX
PUBLISHED: 00:01, Sun, Jan 7, 2018 | UPDATED: 10:25, Sun, Jan 7, 2018








	

		
			
		

		
	
MARKKEHOE/CHANNEL4

Ant Middleton tested reporter Constance Knox (L) at an SAS bootcamp training centre
Ant Middleton spoke out after reports that the elite unit is considering changing its selection process to give female applicants a better chance. 

The 37-year-old former sniper, who now fronts Channel 4’s SAS: Who Dares Wins – which includes women contestants – said they should prove themselves in other close combat roles before being admitted. 

Any member of the Army can apply to join the SAS, including women.

At the end of this year they will be allowed to apply for the Parachute Regiment, Royal Marines, Infantry and Royal Air Force Regiment, following a 2016 announcement by David Cameron that women would be allowed to serve in frontline, ground close-combat units. 





	

		
			
		

		
	
CHANNEL4

Ant saw active service in Northern Ireland, Macedonia and Afghanistan during his time in the Army
I think women need to prove themselves in a combat role first. They can join the Royal Marines and Parachute Regiment and prove themselves in both of those

Ant Middleton

“I don’t think there is a place for women in the special forces at the moment,” said Ant, who served in the Special Boat Service. 

“It’s moving too quickly at the moment. It needs to be a slower progression.

“I think women need to prove themselves in a combat role first. They can join the Royal Marines and Parachute Regiment and prove themselves in both of those. These are important stepping stones towards special forces selection.” 

His comments follow reports that the SAS is considering making its gruelling selection exercises easier for women, who could be allowed to carry lighter loads and given more time for treks to give them a better chance of passing one of the toughest tests in the world. 





	

		
			
		

		
	
INSTAGRAM

Ant believes women should first prove themselves in the Royal Marines or Parachute Regiment
Less than 10 per cent of all candidates make it through the trials, which include a 40-mile, 20-hour march in the Brecon Beacons, South Wales, jungle exercises in Belize and interrogation tests. 

In 2013 three SAS reservists died during a training exercise in Brecon. 

Portsmouth-born Ant served with the Royal Marines and the Paras before, in 2008, joining the Special Boat Service, the UK’s naval special forces unit and the sister unit of the SAS.

He left the military in 2012 and started work as a personal security guard protecting VIPs. 

In 2015 he became a trainer on SAS: Who Dares Wins and is now its chief instructor. 

In the show, Ant and a team of SAS veterans put contestants through their paces in tests which replicate those soldiers must pass to join the unit."


----------



## SirRumpole (30 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> His comments follow reports that the SAS is considering making its gruelling selection exercises easier for women, who could be allowed to carry lighter loads and given more time for treks to give them a better chance of passing one of the toughest tests in the world.




If you have to lower the standards, you reduce the effectiveness, it's pretty obvious.


----------



## moXJO (30 July 2018)

basilio said:


> So you wern't so impressed with the experience of the Defence Chief with regard to the improvement a diverse range of views can offer ?
> 
> _"A diverse workforce is all about capability. The greater our diversity, the greater the range of ideas and insights to challenge the accepted norm, assess the risks, see them from a different perspective, and develop creative solutions," he said.
> 
> ...



Women are fine for a multitude of roles in the army. Combat/infantry roles are not one of them.


----------



## luutzu (30 July 2018)

moXJO said:


> Women are fine for a multitude of roles in the army. Combat/infantry roles are not one of them.




Some woman can be physically as strong, or stronger, than some men. So if a recruit passes those tests, it'd be like any male soldier passing those tests. 

But all this about gender equality and diversity etc., are all pc. Recruitment into the armed forces is drying up. I mean, there's some dozen wars our boss is involved in... and they're planning a few more right here in Asia/Pacific/Indo. 

With not much migrants, illegals, left back home. With a completely "voluntary" military... you'd have to wait until another financial crisis to recruit anyone. Hence the diversity card.


----------



## moXJO (31 July 2018)

luutzu said:


> Some woman can be physically as strong, or stronger, than some men. So if a recruit passes those tests, it'd be like any male soldier passing those tests.
> 
> But all this about gender equality and diversity etc., are all pc. Recruitment into the armed forces is drying up. I mean, there's some dozen wars our boss is involved in... and they're planning a few more right here in Asia/Pacific/Indo.
> 
> With not much migrants, illegals, left back home. With a completely "voluntary" military... you'd have to wait until another financial crisis to recruit anyone. Hence the diversity card.



Their hips pack it in fairly 
quickly (2 years). Due to the weight of the kit and female bone structure. So you waste money on training and medical.
Mixed gender units failed every time when put against male only units when they were trialing it.
But "Girl power" or whatever....


----------



## Tisme (31 July 2018)

Will Michaelia Cash get charged by AFP?


----------



## SirRumpole (31 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> Will Michaelia Cash get charged by AFP?




She would have to find a much larger whiteboard if she does.


----------



## Darc Knight (31 July 2018)

luutzu said:


> Some woman can be physically as strong, or stronger, than some men. So if a recruit passes those tests, it'd be like any male soldier passing those tests.
> 
> .




Hmm. But if we're talking combat roles we are talking about trained Soldiers. Yes, some Women maybe physically fitter than some Men, but once we throw training into the mix Men's bodies respond faster due to hormones, joint sizes, muscle belly length etc. Nature rules Daniel son lol.

Put the female Soldiers on some low dose Steroids and maybe, but females on Steroids are a nightmare generally 

Selection on merit for combat roles imo.


----------



## PZ99 (31 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> Will Michaelia Cash get charged by AFP?



Probably not. 

She'll get scorned for not doing her homework before opening her mouth but that's about it IMO.


----------



## Tisme (31 July 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Probably not.
> 
> She'll get scorned for not doing her homework before opening her mouth but that's about it IMO.




She always has the Hanson Young tears defense to fall back on ... equality in parliament right there


----------



## luutzu (31 July 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> Hmm. But if we're talking combat roles we are talking about trained Soldiers. Yes, some Women maybe physically fitter than some Men, but once we throw training into the mix Men's bodies respond faster due to hormones, joint sizes, muscle belly length etc. Nature rules Daniel son lol.
> 
> Put the female Soldiers on some low dose Steroids and maybe, but females on Steroids are a nightmare generally
> 
> Selection on merit for combat roles imo.




yea, it'd have to be merit. So if the female recruit passes the training... they're qualified. 

We've all seen GI Jane right? Demi More in that could break my neck in a second.


----------



## PZ99 (31 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> She always has the Hanson Young tears defense to fall back on ... equality in parliament right there



True. However the waterworks don't work unless there's a heart which Cash clearly doesn't have.


----------



## luutzu (31 July 2018)

moXJO said:


> Their hips pack it in fairly
> quickly (2 years). Due to the weight of the kit and female bone structure. So you waste money on training and medical.
> Mixed gender units failed every time when put against male only units when they were trialing it.
> But "Girl power" or whatever....




Seen future warfare will mostly be drone-based, female could beat their male counterparts. I mean, they know how to find things when looking for it.


----------



## sptrawler (31 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> Will Michaelia Cash get charged by AFP?



I wonder if this will be another, go fund me page?


----------



## moXJO (31 July 2018)

luutzu said:


> Seen future warfare will mostly be drone-based, female could beat their male counterparts. I mean, they know how to find things when looking for it.



Yeah plenty of areas where women excel in the army. But reality should be the overriding factor. Not gender quotas.


----------



## moXJO (31 July 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I wonder if this will be another, go fund me page?



That page would go negative. Lib women don't get the luxury of tears and sympathy.


----------



## Tisme (31 July 2018)

luutzu said:


> Seen future warfare will mostly be drone-based, female could beat their male counterparts. I mean, they know how to find things when looking for it.




They have 14 yearold boys in desert bunkers to do that already.


----------



## Darc Knight (31 July 2018)

PZ99 said:


> True. However the waterworks don't work unless there's a heart which Cash clearly doesn't have.




Even Andrew Bolt doesn't like Cash


----------



## Tisme (31 July 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I wonder if this will be another, go fund me page?




They'll have to send in female AFP staffers to serve the papers thereby avoiding the theatre of males picking on a defenseless female.

Who could ever forget "_"If you want to start discussing staff matters, be very, very careful. Because I am happy to sit here and name every young woman in Mr Shorten's office over which rumours in this place abound. If you want to go down that path today, I will do it."


_


----------



## luutzu (31 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> They have 14 yearold boys in desert bunkers to do that already.




Boys cannot find anything beside food and girls. Both of which are very rare in places their drones... err... protect. That's why the Pentagon got Google to help ID places and things. 

I guess a few hippies at Google protest against doing evil so. Ey, shouldn't joke about these


----------



## Tisme (31 July 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> Even Andrew Bolt doesn't like Cash




Too much spunk for Andrew?


----------



## Tisme (31 July 2018)

luutzu said:


> Boys cannot find anything beside food and girls. Both of which are very rare in places their drones... err... protect. That's why the Pentagon got Google to help ID places and things.
> 
> I guess a few hippies at Google protest against doing evil so. Ey, shouldn't joke about these




Not sure about the girls, but food and keyboard yes.


----------



## luutzu (31 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> Not sure about the girls, but food and keyboard yes.




You can't find girls with a keyboard?


----------



## sptrawler (31 July 2018)

Tisme said:


> View attachment 88627
> 
> 
> They'll have to send in female AFP staffers to serve the papers thereby avoiding the theatre of males picking on a defenseless female.
> ...




Jeez Tisme, that photo of Michaelia, reminds me of my missus when I leave the toilet seat up.


----------



## Tisme (31 July 2018)

luutzu said:


> You can't find girls with a keyboard?




Don't think they are a high agenda item when you have Lollipop Chainsaw


----------



## luutzu (31 July 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Jeez Tisme, that photo of Michaelia, reminds me of my missus when I leave the toilet seat up.




I just figured out why the toilet seats have to be down... and it's not for the woman, it's for the kids. 

Kids always lift those up or put it down... and they grab it proper so that's why we men ,and awesome fathers, have to put it down.

It's not done for the older woman's sake. 

Wanna try that line with your missus and let us know how it goes


----------



## PZ99 (31 July 2018)

PZ99 said:


> She'll get scorned for not doing her homework before opening her mouth but that's about it IMO.





Tisme said:


> View attachment 88627



I'm retracting my comment - she's clearly leaking


----------



## SirRumpole (2 August 2018)

More gifts for the mates ?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-02/malcolm-turnbull-reef-funding-meeting/10066254


----------



## Tisme (2 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> More gifts for the mates ?
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-02/malcolm-turnbull-reef-funding-meeting/10066254




How much gets to the coal face?


----------



## SirRumpole (2 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> How much gets to the coal face?




That will be interesting to see.

I hope someone is keeping a watch on it.


----------



## Tisme (3 August 2018)

Don't watch if you cant handle base language:


----------



## DB008 (13 August 2018)

Turnbull will be gone come next election.

He is out of touch with the people and making too many idiotic mistakes. 

Huge $400+ million unexpected, not asked for, cash package to a Barrier Reef team of 6 people while farmers are committing suicide weekly and they get $140 million. Muppet


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 August 2018)

DB008 said:


> Turnbull will be gone come next election.
> 
> He is out of touch with the people and making too many idiotic mistakes.



He doesn't need the money or scrutiny. A smart person would enjoy what life time they have left.


----------



## DB008 (13 August 2018)

Easy money...


----------



## Tisme (14 August 2018)




----------



## Tisme (14 August 2018)

Malcolm is being baited ....still:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dkh4TVKVAAIsdPo.jpg:large


----------



## SirRumpole (14 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> Malcolm is being baited ....still:
> 
> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dkh4TVKVAAIsdPo.jpg:large




As I initimated in another thread, without a price guarantee the NEG is a statement of hope rather than a guarantee of lower prices.


----------



## Smurf1976 (14 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> How much gets to the coal face?



If there's coal involved then I'm sure there'll be plenty of funding.....


----------



## Tisme (15 August 2018)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-14/great-barrier-reef-foundation-snorkelling-trip/10117660


----------



## SirRumpole (17 August 2018)

Liberal rebels show Turnbull who's boss.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-...to-legislate-paris-agreement-targets/10134284


----------



## sptrawler (18 August 2018)

You two are starting to look panicky.


----------



## Tisme (18 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> You two are starting to look panicky.




who,what,where  !!! Panic is for Guardian readers isn't it?

Otherwise nothing to panic about:

Climate change might be real, but nothing to worry about in foreseeable future;
Malcolm T is a hollow man, but so are the pollies who rode the equity and gender tickets into parliament;
Australian cricket teams are an archaic remnant of boring 42degC Sundays, not cultural ambassadors;
The Brisbane Lions are still the greatest team result in "AFL" history;
Teflon Donald continues to confound his critics;
Labor has become the Liberal Party and the LNP are better tagged as the Mercantile Party;
Perdition will sort out who broke Jebus' rules ....  that's 61.3% right there not getting a ticket to ride.


----------



## fiftyeight (19 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Liberal rebels show Turnbull who's boss.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-...to-legislate-paris-agreement-targets/10134284




This is ridiculous. If we are burning coal, lets just do it and have some cheap power. If we are switching to renewable good, lets just cop the hit and go green.

Abbott has a lot to answer for this mess, so does the Rudd/Gillard debacle and so do the Greens when you they rejected the Rudd carbon tax.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...rets-over-carbon-decision-20130904-2t53i.html


----------



## SirRumpole (19 August 2018)

fiftyeight said:


> This is ridiculous. If we are burning coal, lets just do it and have some cheap power. If we are switching to renewable good, lets just cop the hit and go green.
> 
> Abbott has a lot to answer for this mess, so does the Rudd/Gillard debacle and so do the Greens when you they rejected the Rudd carbon tax.
> 
> https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...rets-over-carbon-decision-20130904-2t53i.html




The Libs having to rely on Labor for support after some of their own may defect.

It's deliciously bizarre.


----------



## fiftyeight (19 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The Libs having to rely on Labor for support after some of their own may defect.
> 
> It's deliciously bizarre.




Another decade of stalemate on its way


----------



## sptrawler (19 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The Libs having to rely on Labor for support after some of their own may defect.
> 
> It's deliciously bizarre.



It's actually bizzare that those calling for a sensible approach, are being shouted down, it just shows how dumb people are.


----------



## Tisme (19 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> It's actually bizzare that those calling for a sensible approach, are being shouted down, it just shows how dumb people are.




Can't see the common sense for the bookended noise


----------



## Tisme (19 August 2018)

It's on:

https://www.9news.com.au/2018/08/19/18/58/malcolm-turnbull-leadership-challenge-peter-dutton


----------



## sptrawler (19 August 2018)

They have to be kidding FFS


----------



## moXJO (20 August 2018)

If they think they are getting votes with Dutton,  then libs have completely lost the plot. Seriously, are they that bloody thick.


----------



## Smurf1976 (20 August 2018)

Sadly I think this is what happens in a country with many years of uninterrupted prosperity achieved "easily" through reliance on natural resources and a fair bit of sheer good luck.

The standard of governance declines.

There are no doubt some exceptions globally, eg Norway is one, but broadly speaking it seems to be the case that "easy" wealth doesn't result in a government that is both a strong leader and democratically elected. With easy money one aspect, strong leadership or democracy, tends to fail and sometimes both.

I hate to say it but I think it will take some "disaster" of sorts to produce strong leadership from either side of politics. Something drastic that forces real leadership to emerge from one party or the other.


----------



## luutzu (20 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> Sadly I think this is what happens in a country with many years of uninterrupted prosperity achieved "easily" through reliance on natural resources and a fair bit of sheer good luck.
> 
> The standard of governance declines.
> 
> ...




What we need is another Paul Keating. Don't we, McGee? 

While great leadership will do wonders, I think we shouldn't hold our breath for one. 

The plebs better get organised and politically active to force any real change. Else it'll just be the same old bs with different flavours. One party doing one segment of the corporate world's bidding... upset the plebs they voted them out; new group comes in, same stuff to the other business interests; plebs vote them out... round and round it goes. 

It'll only be through mass movement that "great leadership", or opportunistic ones, will come about and "lead". Else it'll just spiral until Beijing comes knocking. 

Well, a Napoleon, or a Stalin, Mao... might rise out of mass movements so I guess lesson is to not burnt stuff down, just enough pitchforks to start them wetting their pants a bit should move things in the right direction.


----------



## wayneL (20 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> What we need is another Paul Keating. Don't we, McGee?
> 
> While great leadership will do wonders, I think we shouldn't hold our breath for one.
> 
> ...



Agreed,  but the problem partly lies with the electorate also,  for some of the same reasons. 

There is just not the critical mass of plebeians in the back shed searching for that old pitchfork while they are distracted by the trivialities of intersectionality and smashed avacado </tongueonlypartlyincheek>


----------



## Tisme (20 August 2018)

moXJO said:


> If they think they are getting votes with Dutton,  then libs have completely lost the plot. Seriously, are they that bloody thick.





Dutton = Trojan horse


----------



## Tisme (20 August 2018)

wayneL said:


> Agreed,  but the problem partly lies with the electorate also,  for some of the same reasons.
> 
> There is just not the critical mass of plebeians in the back shed searching for that old pitchfork while they are distracted by the trivialities of intersectionality and smashed avacado </tongueonlypartlyincheek>




The bigger concern for LNP PMs is when Rupert comes to town .... guess what...

Add in the Abbott & Costello duo, the latter being in charge of the Nine Network.


----------



## dutchie (20 August 2018)

moXJO said:


> If they think they are getting votes with Dutton,  then libs have completely lost the plot. Seriously, are they that bloody thick.



You may be unpleasantly surprised. They need to do something as Turnbull is pathetic.
The electorate needs and is looking for a "Trump".


----------



## moXJO (20 August 2018)

dutchie said:


> You may be unpleasantly surprised. They need to do something as Turnbull is pathetic.
> The electorate needs and is looking for a "Trump".



The conservatives have been too invasive into people's privacy. Cash restrictions,  data logging, geo blocking, internet blocking, big brother like tech snooping. They have no problem restricting freedom.
So they can go jam it up their clacker. I've got no time for attempts at authoritarian govts either side of politics.

Turnbulls biggest problem is he went along with it to appease them. Turnbull is fairly middle of the road. Just doesn't sell well.


----------



## fiftyeight (20 August 2018)

While Turnbull keeps trying to appease everyone while pleasing no one, he will die a death by a thousand cuts


----------



## drsmith (20 August 2018)

Malcolm Turnbull in the 3-years since taking the PM-ship from Tony Abbott has clearly been unable to unite the party which is what he needed to do first and foremost to succeed. Too transactional in the end was Malcolm.

It's clear from both Labor and Liberal that political assassination of a PM from by coup from within leaves too much bad blood for that party to be able to govern effectively.

One can only hope at this point that MT will do what Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott couldn't, but I don't hold much hope of that.


----------



## moXJO (20 August 2018)

fiftyeight said:


> While Turnbull keeps trying to appease everyone while pleasing no one, he will die a death by a thousand cuts



This is his big problem. To have a vision for the country means you are going to 
pi$$ some people off. 

And thats whats lacking right now. Too busy trying to keep everyone happy. Not enough stones to get on with the job and drive the country.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 August 2018)

drsmith said:


> Malcolm Turnbull in the 3-years since taking the PM-ship from Tony Abbott has clearly been unable to unite the party which is what he needed to do first and foremost to succeed. Too transactional in the end was Malcolm.
> 
> It's clear from both Labor and Liberal that political assassination of a PM from by coup from within leaves too much bad blood for that party to be able to govern effectively.
> 
> One can only hope at this point that MT will do what Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott couldn't, but I don't hold much hope of that.




What I don't get it that the majority of the Libs party room seems to be in favour of the neg and the vote proved that.

So why do the few that opposed get all the attention ? 

A confident PM would say that he won the vote now lets get on with it and leave the few to mumble into their gins. But instead he's heaving to and fro all over the place trying to make everyone happy, which he never will.


----------



## drsmith (20 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> So why do the few that opposed get all the attention ?



Little confidence in the electorate on reducing electricity prices and elected members copping that feedback from their electorates is my guess.


----------



## McLovin (20 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:
			
		

> Sadly I think this is what happens in a country with many years of uninterrupted prosperity achieved "easily" through reliance on natural resources and a fair bit of sheer good luck.




Most governments are hopeless. Australia had a good run in the 1980s with Hawke and Keating, but aside from that Australian government has always been pretty mediocre. That is after all the original context of the term "the lucky country". 



moXJO said:


> This is his big problem. To have a vision for the country means you are going to
> pi$$ some people off.
> 
> And thats whats lacking right now. Too busy trying to keep everyone happy. Not enough stones to get on with the job and drive the country.




Bingo. Get rid of all the half-wit ideologues. Fix up the disaster that is the senate. It's so un-representative of its original purpose these days.

The LNP is history if Dutton is PM.


----------



## McLovin (20 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> What I don't get it that the majority of the Libs party room seems to be in favour of the neg and the vote proved that.
> 
> So why do the few that opposed get all the attention ?




Because the government has a one seat majority.


----------



## Logique (20 August 2018)

drsmith said:


> Little confidence in the electorate on *reducing electricity prices* and elected members copping that feedback from their electorates is my guess.



Little confidence is right! But nobody that believes electricity prices are coming down, any time soon. Except perhaps Daniel Andrews.

But the punters will go ahead and vote Shorten anyway, as if that will make electricity any cheaper. The renewables target will rise big time under Labor.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 August 2018)

McLovin said:


> Because the government has a one seat majority.




They never seem to get that disunity is death. All very well to have disagreements in the Party room, but to air them in public lacks discipline and ruins the party image. 

It's now wide open for Labor to go down the "if they can't run their own party they can't run the country" road.


----------



## Tisme (20 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> What we need is another Paul Keating. Don't we, McGee?




Yes we need someone who is articulate, astute, head strong, visionary, displeases everyone equally, tells corporate leaders and commo union leaders where to go and makes parliament sittings interesting


----------



## Tisme (20 August 2018)

Imagine if the Labs did agree ..... that would be like uber inflammatory to the party members who don't want the bill; Malcolm once again blaming everyone else:


----------



## Tisme (20 August 2018)

Bill Shorten says: "
_Do you have any idea what the current government position is? I think it is a fair point, but when you ask us what we will have to do to agree with them, what is their current position?

On Tuesday Mr Turnbull said an emissions target must be legislated. Then he said to not legislated would be an assault on democracy. Then Friday he was prepared to assault democracy. Today, we have our best hieroglyphics alternatives out trying to understand the merchant bankers’ gobbledygook policy this morning. When you have an alternative, come and talk to us. When the Prime Minister says bipartisanship is beyond us, that is unfair. We have been willing to consider whatever proposal they come up with. They don’t have a functioning proposal. Mr Turnbull sat down with us, but that has changed, I can’t keep up with the internal warfare”_


----------



## Knobby22 (20 August 2018)

Turnbull should just resign. Abbott will do and say anything to get him, so why continue. Appeasement just weakens him in front of the electorate.

He could have been a good Prime Minister but some of the Libs won't let him due to having a blind point with regard global warming. As if Dutton would get any more votes! This election will hand everything to Labor to do what they want.


----------



## luutzu (20 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> Yes we need someone who is articulate, astute, head strong, visionary, displeases everyone equally, tells corporate leaders and commo union leaders where to go and makes parliament sittings interesting




And so, so very handsome to boot


----------



## moXJO (20 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> Bill Shorten says: "
> _Do you have any idea what the current government position is? I think it is a fair point, but when you ask us what we will have to do to agree with them, what is their current position?
> 
> On Tuesday Mr Turnbull said an emissions target must be legislated. Then he said to not legislated would be an assault on democracy. Then Friday he was prepared to assault democracy. Today, we have our best hieroglyphics alternatives out trying to understand the merchant bankers’ gobbledygook policy this morning. When you have an alternative, come and talk to us. When the Prime Minister says bipartisanship is beyond us, that is unfair. We have been willing to consider whatever proposal they come up with. They don’t have a functioning proposal. Mr Turnbull sat down with us, but that has changed, I can’t keep up with the internal warfare”_



Liberal party kicking own goals now.


----------



## overhang (20 August 2018)

Logique said:


> Little confidence is right! But nobody that believes electricity prices are coming down, any time soon. Except perhaps Daniel Andrews.
> 
> But the punters will go ahead and vote Shorten anyway, as if that will make electricity any cheaper. The renewables target will rise big time under Labor.




Renewables are the scapegoat, the elephant in the room is that we have an aging electrical grid that requires new generation in some form or another, regardless of replacement source energy prices were going to increase anyway.  Anything to distract from the fact we've had the lowest wage growth under this government and their fix is to give company tax cuts in hope some of the cream trickles down to the average worker.


----------



## Smurf1976 (20 August 2018)

drsmith said:


> Little confidence in the electorate on reducing electricity prices and elected members copping that feedback from their electorates is my guess.



Thing is, electricity in Australia wasn't broken until politicians deliberately broke it against the advice of everyone from engineers to unions.

Before all that began it was one of our national strengths, having the third cheapest electricity in the OECD, beaten only by NZ and Canada with their much greater share of cheap hydro power when compared to Australia. So we were doing it extremely well and that's despite the challenge of low population density.

We have the engineering expertise and we have an abundance of natural resources both conventional (eg coal) and unconventional (eg tidal) suitable for the production of electricity so of all possible problems we may have in Australia quite simply electricity should not be one of them.

Floods, droughts, bushfires and being remote from other major countries are real problems we'll always struggle with but when it comes to electricity, that's a completely manufactured problem that simply should not exist.


----------



## Logique (20 August 2018)

overhang said:


> Renewables are the scapegoat, the elephant in the room is that we have an aging electrical grid that requires new generation in some form or another, regardless of replacement source energy prices were going to increase anyway.  Anything to distract from the fact we've had the lowest wage growth under this government and their fix is to give company tax cuts in hope some of the cream trickles down to the average worker.



It's not only merchant bankers that do gobbledygook! You forgot to bag AGL and the other power companies, which is the other diversionary tactic. Point the finger at everyone else, that's the strategy. 

What do you think is holding up ".._new generation in some form or another_". Plenty of coal and uranium in the ground.


----------



## overhang (20 August 2018)

Logique said:


> It's not only merchant bankers that do gobbledygook! You forgot to bag AGL and the other power companies, which is the other diversionary tactic. Point the finger at everyone else, that's the strategy.
> 
> What do you think is holding up ".._new generation in some form or another_". Plenty of coal and uranium in the ground.




This is true, I heard Andrews on the radio earlier putting the blame squarely on the energy companies.

It doesn't matter what is holding up the new generation other than to say we require new generation and regardless of energy source our bills are going to increase accordingly, it just becomes a question of how much, how clean do we want it and how secure do we want the energy source.


----------



## SirRumpole (20 August 2018)

overhang said:


> This is true, I heard Andrews on the radio earlier putting the blame squarely on the energy companies.
> 
> It doesn't matter what is holding up the new generation other than to say we require new generation and regardless of energy source our bills are going to increase accordingly, it just becomes a question of how much, how clean do we want it and how secure do we want the energy source.




Government funded generators gave up cheap power for decades. Instead of waiting for energy companies to decide how much they want to rip us off governments should just get the best engineering advice and build the generators of the future whether it be gas, solar, wind, nuclear or whatever.

The LNP are too stifled with "free market economic theory" to contemplate such initiatives lest it detract from their business mate's profits, so it looks like it's going to be up to the next Labor government.


----------



## Tisme (20 August 2018)

Govt already ahead of Paris agreement ...... this bloke says so:


----------



## Smurf1976 (20 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Government funded generators gave up cheap power for decades. Instead of waiting for energy companies to decide how much they want to rip us off governments should just get the best engineering advice and build the generators of the future whether it be gas, solar, wind, nuclear or whatever.




I'll post some more detailed comments in the energy thread but what most ordinary people are likely missing in this debate is that price is really a sideline and something that should be easy to fix.

Things falling apart physically is a far bigger problem......


----------



## satanoperca (20 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> Govt already ahead of Paris agreement ...... this bloke says so:




that is so funny, don't worry we are meeting it, as the people who told me so, said it was so, so did my wife when she told me a huge a big one, while shagging the guy with an actual big one.
Please, is this the quality of representatives that are looking after this country


----------



## dutchie (21 August 2018)

It's time for Malcolm to go. Today ???


----------



## sptrawler (21 August 2018)

dutchie said:


> It's time for Malcolm to go. Today ???




I certainly hope so, at least it will stop the media crapping on about it endlessly, one wonders if the situation hasn't just been fabricated by the media.


----------



## dutchie (21 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I certainly hope so, at least it will stop the media crapping on about it endlessly, one wonders if the situation hasn't just been fabricated by the media.



More than likely, as MSM fabricates *everything.*


----------



## bigdog (21 August 2018)

Voting underway for new prime minister now


----------



## drsmith (21 August 2018)

MT has spilt the leadership. Him and PD running.


----------



## overhang (21 August 2018)

And Turnbull survives 48-35.  Surely Dutton steps down from cabinet now


----------



## dutchie (21 August 2018)

48 to 35 for Malcolm. It's just a matter of time now.


----------



## drsmith (21 August 2018)

overhang said:


> Surely Dutton steps down from cabinet now



That's the interesting bit now, and who else??

All done very quickly with the media outside.


----------



## McLovin (21 August 2018)

drsmith said:


> That's the interesting bit now, and who else??
> 
> All done very quickly with the media outside.




Who cares? The Libs are imploding and the circus rolls on. If the best they can offer for PM is the Village Idiot then they don't deserve government, even though the other side looks fkn awful too. Interesting scenario is if Dutton rolls Turnbull and Turnbull quits forcing Wentworth by-election the Libs may struggle to hold Wentworth which would force a general election.

What a waste of our money; it's just a big taxpayer funded circle-jerk. They're the best advertisement for why anyone with half a brain would never go into politics.


----------



## PZ99 (21 August 2018)

overhang said:


> And Turnbull survives 48-35.  Surely Dutton steps down from cabinet now



Dutto's in a marginal seat I think - so he's finished either way.


----------



## PZ99 (21 August 2018)

I think Turnbull should leave the Libs and stand as an independent


----------



## dutchie (21 August 2018)

PZ99 said:


> I think Turnbull should leave the Libs and stand as an independent



More likely as a Labor candidate.


----------



## PZ99 (21 August 2018)

dutchie said:


> More likely as a Labor candidate.



LOL - anyone who's seen Bill Shortens' kitchen would never want to lead the ALP.

It's full of red and blue knives 

His fireplace is even more egregious...


----------



## fiftyeight (21 August 2018)

Take the NEG to Parliament with a carbon emissions target legislated and put the pressure on his back bench and ALP to actually take a stance. Go out swinging and let the chips fall where they fall


----------



## IFocus (21 August 2018)

dutchie said:


> More likely as a Labor candidate.




True Labor is more like the Liberal party of old now.


----------



## IFocus (21 August 2018)

Dutton as PM.....you couldn't make that up could you.

So how many PMs has Abbott brought down now?


----------



## PZ99 (21 August 2018)

IFocus said:


> Dutton as PM.....you couldn't make that up could you.
> 
> So how many PMs has Abbott brought down now?



You know you gotta problem when members of your own party want you to leave unilaterally. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-...ny-abbott-to-quit-federal-parliament/10145006


----------



## wayneL (21 August 2018)

IFocus said:


> True Labor is more like the Liberal party of old now.



Surely you jest. 

I don't recall the Liberal Party of old being postmodernist cultural Marxists; that's the Liberal Party of *today.


----------



## Knobby22 (21 August 2018)

Never seen a party commit suicide before.
Turnbull will quit forcing an election.
Labor are going to have a huge majority after this so the right wing of the Libs can feel pure. They will of course blame Turnbull for their predicament.


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 August 2018)

So far as I'm concerned the Liberals are far too ideologically driven with their right wing corporate welfare & bash those genuinely in need stuff whilst handing out $ billions in welfare to those who don't need it.

Turnbull's the only one they've had in a while who seemed to have any real intelligence so it's not surprising others would want him out, he shows them up too much.

Sadly I don't think Labor's much good either.


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 August 2018)

McLovin said:


> What a waste of our money; it's just a big taxpayer funded circle-jerk. They're the best advertisement for why anyone with half a brain would never go into politics.



I gave it a serious thought once but concluded that anyone who made a real effort and had any good ideas would be cut down in practice and that goes for either party.

What I've seen unfold with Turnbull and others confirms that view and I suspect that most who have ever considered it would have similar conclusions. Any other job from professions to trades to things like cleaning or driving buses all offers a far greater prospect of success and actually getting something done. If politics was compared to bus driving, well you'd be lucky to complete the route even once without someone hijacking the bus and throwing you out the window.


----------



## overhang (21 August 2018)

So he has two options really and none are a winnable position, he can try harder to appease the right faction of the liberal party but as proven during Abbott's time as PM this isn't popular with the electorate.  Or he can have a policy shift to try and win back those swinging voters that have deserted his party but then he will be ousted by the right wing of his party, I doubt the electorate will trust any commitments he makes anyway knowing that the right in the party will overthrow his leadership abandoning Turnbulls policies in the process.


----------



## sptrawler (21 August 2018)

At least giving everyone a go as P.M, they probably qualify for a bigger pension.


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 August 2018)

overhang said:


> he can try harder to appease the right faction of the liberal party but as proven during Abbott's time as PM this isn't popular with the electorate.  Or he can have a policy shift to try and win back those swinging voters that have deserted his party but then he will be ousted by the right wing of his party



So basically the country is being shafted once again by these so-called "right wing" types.

The "right" does tend to be involved when bad stuff happens yes.


----------



## McLovin (21 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> I gave it a serious thought once but concluded that anyone who made a real effort and had any good ideas would be cut down in practice and that goes for either party.




We recently had a local issue that required us to engage with local and state politicians and ministers. I've never been involved in any of that sort of stuff and it was pretty eye opening. We had some pretty big swinging d!cks on our committee so we had a real leg up in getting high level access plenty of media exposure in the SMH/Daily Tele/AFR/even 2GB etc, but undeniably the most useful at both state and local were the independent councillors and our local independent state MP. The big party around here is Liberal and they dominate the local council and they were absolutely useless. The independent councillors actually reached out to us because they had an angle that they thought would help (amazing!) and our local state MP did the same and made himself available at every turn.

For me it was a huge eye-opener. I agree with you that the big party machines tend to end up producing cookie cutter cr@p and cutting people who have good ideas but can't sell them, but I'd never really appreciated the value of strong local independents and their value to the local community.


----------



## Tisme (21 August 2018)

I wonder if Anning will be asked to lead the Libs?


----------



## SirRumpole (21 August 2018)

A pretty frightening advance by the hard right of the Liberal Party.

The people who want to privatise everything including Medicare and the ABC, not to mention more assaults on our civil rights and privacy.

Dutton is useless, a man of little intellect but big ambitions.

Fortunately I don't think he'll get near the top job, after today's effort  I reckon the Libs are toast.


----------



## sptrawler (21 August 2018)

Oh well, it gives the media another three months of trash, to fill their papers with. Saves them from having to get out and find a story.
Hopefully Labor win with a massive majority, then at least something can be done, and somebody can be held accountable.
I'm certainly over the last few years, of log jammed politics.


----------



## sptrawler (21 August 2018)

This article already on the West Australian newspaper website, just highlights what is wrong with our media. 
I'm not a fan of Dutton, but if someone else was portrayed the same way, there would be hell to pay. Imagine if it was a coloured person, or a person from a different ethnic background.
It really is outrageous that, because he is a bald white dude, it's acceptable to put it in the paper.

https://thewest.com.au/politics/put...ons-failed-leadership-challenge-ng-b88935337z

The media is just out of control, with bias and dictating what is acceptable and what isn't. IMO


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> The people who want to privatise everything including Medicare and the ABC, not to mention more assaults on our civil rights and privacy.



There's something about the Liberals I just don't get. 

By Australian historic standards they're an extreme Right party these days when it comes to government actually doing anything. Examples such as health, utilities and the ABC all come to mind - it's privatise the lot.

The same party hands out welfare to the middle classes who don't need it. Blatant vote buying in the guise of socialism.

Given I'm more worried about the former category I consider them as being way too far to the right Right these days but someone with different priorities could argue they're too far to the Left with all the intervention in peoples lives and middle class welfare.

In 2018 the Liberals stand for ????

That's not to say Labor's great, they're not, but their overall approach does seem a bit more consistent than the Liberals'. Labor goes about as far to the Left as the Liberals do but they don't go anywhere near as far to the Right so their policies seem a lot more consistent overall.


----------



## wayneL (21 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> So basically the country is being shafted once again by these so-called "right wing" types.
> 
> The "right" does tend to be involved when bad stuff happens yes.



Care to justify that comment?


----------



## sptrawler (21 August 2018)

It might be different in Tassie smurph, but I don't see a lot of difference between any of them, just because Labor say they won't do this and won't do that quite often changes when in office.


----------



## satanoperca (21 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> In 2018 the Liberals stand for ????



What do they stand for? Actually what does the ALP stand for? Can someone give me a simple to statement, one line sentence for what both parties stand for?
Think it as asking both parties to write a Adwords campaign, they have a 165 characters to describe their business.
I am just a common person, like the rest of the population (95%).
What is the message we are meant to be receiving?


----------



## SirRumpole (21 August 2018)

satanoperca said:


> What do they stand for? Actually what does the ALP stand for? Can someone give me a simple to statement, one line sentence for what both parties stand for?
> Think it as asking both parties to write a Adwords campaign, they have a 165 characters to describe their business.
> I am just a common person, like the rest of the population (95%).
> What is the message we are meant to be receiving?




I think you have to look at their policies as that is the result of their ideology.

Libs- tax cuts for big business, that has been their only consistent policy to date. Big business doesn't need tax cuts, they avoid paying taxes as much as they can anyway and their profits keep going up and up, mostly.

Labor - the originators of Gonski and NDIS, negative gearing and family trust 'reform' , clawing back some money from people who don't really it and can afford to buy second houses with the aid of the taxpayer.

That's my take at the moment. The Libs have been in for 5 years, if they had a chance of implementing their policies they would have done so by now. All Labor can do at the moment is talk about their policies, but education and NDIS are policies that have received some some of bi partisan support.


----------



## sptrawler (21 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I think you have to look at their policies as that is the result of their ideology.
> 
> Libs- tax cuts for big business, that has been their only consistent policy to date. Big business doesn't need tax cuts, they avoid paying taxes as much as they can anyway and their profits keep going up and up, mostly.




If you would like to read the pro ABC fact check on company tax cuts, it make interesting reading.
Like I said, there isn't much difference between them, just a blind faith of Labor followers in Labor's spoken word. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-29/fact-check-labor-on-corporate-tax-cuts/7549754

It is worth reading the whole article a bit long winded, but that's politics. lol


----------



## satanoperca (21 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I think you have to look at their policies as that is the result of their ideology.
> Libs- tax cuts for big business, that has been their only consistent policy to date. Big business doesn't need tax cuts, they avoid paying taxes as much as they can anyway and their profits keep going up and up, mostly.



 Agreed, they don't pay any taxes anyway, so why give them a tax cut on something they don't pay for anyway. Dumb Policy


SirRumpole said:


> Labor - the originators of Gonski and NDIS, negative gearing and family trust 'reform' , clawing back some money from people who don't really it and can afford to buy second houses with the aid of the taxpayer.



 Agreed if they actually implement their policies if in power.



SirRumpole said:


> That's my take at the moment. The Libs have been in for 5 years, if they had a chance of implementing their policies they would have done so by now.



This I 100% agree on, they have had 5 years and still haven't delivered. If they were an employee of a company and keep promising and promising, would they have a job after 5 years.


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 August 2018)

wayneL said:


> Care to justify that comment?



If you are a member of a political party then you are bound by party policy. That's the basic concept of it otherwise the parties become pointless.

It looks to me that the Right factions of the Liberals are determined to wreck their own party simply because they can't get their way within it. A way which, if taken to an election as policy, would likely (my opinion there) not be accepted by a sufficient number of Australians in order to result in the party forming government.

It's the same concept with any sort of union. If you join it then you are bound by it. Don't join if you're not willing to go along with that.

The term "bad losers" comes to mind. Can't get their own way within the party, probably couldn't win an election if they did, so just wreck the party then.

If Labor were doing a great job then it wouldn't bother me so much but we seem to be faced with a choice of either jumping out of the plane with what we think is a parachute that might work maybe or staying on board with all the engines having stopped and hoping to survive whatever sort of landing takes place. Not a great choice either way.

What I would like to see is a stable government, with clear goals, acting in the country's interests not their own. Whilst I see the Liberals as unlikely to produce such a government I'd be fine with them if they did actually do it. Same if it's Labor or anyone else. Stable, clear goals and in the country's interests not their own personal gain. 

Likewise I don't particularly care for any personal stuff in all of that. It's fine with me if the PM's last job was as a banker. It's fine if they were a lawyer or a unionist and for that matter I wouldn't really care if there's a hundred nude photos of them somewhere so long as they're up to the task and get on with it.


----------



## sptrawler (21 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> If Labor were doing a great job then it wouldn't bother me so much but we seem to be faced with a choice of either jumping out of the plane with what we think is a parachute that might work maybe or staying on board with all the engines having stopped and hoping to survive whatever sort of landing takes place. Not a great choice either way.




It will be interesting to hear your comments, when Labor bring in their emission targets, which is the main stumbling block that the LNP are having.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> If you would like to read the pro ABC fact check on company tax cuts, it make interesting reading.
> Like I said, there isn't much difference between them, just a blind faith of Labor followers in Labor's spoken word.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-29/fact-check-labor-on-corporate-tax-cuts/7549754
> ...




We may have been able to afford company tax cuts when Labor made those proposals (and Labor did vote for tax cuts for small business), but after the Libs have doubled the debt and deficit and when new infrastructure like power stations and storage is needed, it's unaffordable now.


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> It will be interesting to hear your comments, when Labor bring in their emission targets, which is the main stumbling block that the LNP are having.



Suffice to say that whilst I think the Liberals are doing a terrible job I'm not at all convinced that Labor will do a good job either. If I was then I'd be just sitting back watching the Liberals implode without any concerns but in practice it doesn't seem at all certain that the alternative's going to do a great job either.

The only real expectation I have is that Labor would actually do something. As in they will actually implement some policies. Not necessarily good policies but they'll implement something.

The issue does need to be settled though and we're at the point where even a bad decision is becoming better than no decision since the time for which "do nothing" is an option seems to be running out in every possible way - economic, environmental, technical and political.

As a country this issue has been in the news on a regular basis for literally 30 years now, 1988 being the year it came to mainstream public attention. Time to get it sorted.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 August 2018)

PZ99 said:


> I think Turnbull should leave the Libs and stand as an independent




Either that or take a few others with him and form a "new centre" party.

Holding the balance of power over a minority Conservative government would be a deliciously ironical.


----------



## PZ99 (21 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Either that or take a few others with him and form a "new centre" party.
> 
> Holding the balance of power over a minority Conservative government would be a deliciously ironical.



In that case re-form the Democrats. The party I usually turned to when the Chipps were down.

More developments > https://www.news.com.au/national/po...p/news-story/8f225cec3d2dcc45d6743991bf05afdf


----------



## overhang (21 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> It will be interesting to hear your comments, when Labor bring in their emission targets, which is the main stumbling block that the LNP are having.




Turnbull already made a huge concession to the right in the party by axing the emissions reduction target.  But listening to Craig Kelly on the radio today and they want more, he basically insinuated that they want a coal power station built.  That is the ideology that Turnbull is confronted with, some on the right have even suggested the government should subsidise the commissioning of one. 

And you're correct to point out that Labor won't find it any easier, if I recall even with a landslide win a senate majority would be difficult for Labor to obtain so expect to see them hamstrung by the Greens again.


----------



## moXJO (21 August 2018)

Maybe they are hard selling Dutton as PM. So that when Tony Abbott comes back from the dead and steals top spot.  Its a very slight relief


----------



## sptrawler (21 August 2018)

overhang said:


> Turnbull already made a huge concession to the right in the party by axing the emissions reduction target.  But listening to Craig Kelly on the radio today and they want more, he basically insinuated that they want a coal power station built.  That is the ideology that Turnbull is confronted with, some on the right have even suggested the government should subsidise the commissioning of one.




I personally think building a Government owned, very large coal fired Power Station, is probably the only way we can transition to a reliable renewable system.
If the Government owned it, it wouldn't be hamstrung by shareholders and driven by profit, it could be used as a reliable source of generation without the need to make money. Therefore while the storage solutions(Snowy 2 and Tassie pumped hydro) are being built, we aren't at the mercy of private generators, when the system is stable and the plant is no longer required you close it.

Then the private operators could be encouraged to install renewable's, without the current conflict of interest, they don't want to keep old plant running. They just want to make money out of it, and they don't want to install new non renewable plant.

To leave the Power System completely in the hands of private operators, while they have a conflict of interest is madness, as has been shown by the plants that have been closed, smurph has already explained the dire state of the system.

What will it be like in 5 years?

The private operators will have the Government over a barrel, when the system collapses, it will have to throw mega bucks at them to get us out of the $hit.
When it happens, many will sit back and say, I told you so.

The problem is ATM, non of the media are airing the arguments for and against, just shouting about a Party disagreement.
Why aren't they debating the actual issues of contention?


----------



## overhang (21 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I personally think building a Government owned, very large coal fired Power Station, is probably the only way we can transition to a reliable renewable system.
> If the Government owned it, it wouldn't be hamstrung by shareholders and driven by profit, it could be used as a reliable source of generation without the need to make money. Therefore while the storage solutions(Snowy 2 and Tassie pumped hydro) are being built, we aren't at the mercy of private generators, when the system is stable and the plant is no longer required you close it.
> 
> What will it be like in 5 years?
> ...




Snowy 2 completion date is 2024, considering new coal plants take 5-6 years to build then it won't be any quicker.  So you want the government to build an asset because past governments sold out our power generation and got us in this mess, just so future governments can sell it off again and repeat the cycle.  Perhaps the focus should be why we sold out our gas interests, why Japan pay less for our gas than we pay, why the US gas price is almost half as much as ours.


----------



## sptrawler (21 August 2018)

overhang said:


> Snowy 2 completion date is 2024, considering new coal plants take 5-6 years to build then it won't be any quicker.  So you want the government to build an asset because past governments sold out our power generation and got us in this mess, just so future governments can sell it off again and repeat the cycle.  .




No actually I was only suggesting they build a Power Station, to ensure you guys over East have a reasonably reliable reasonably priced electricity system, being in W.A I really don't give a ratz Ar$e.
Best of luck.


----------



## Toyota Lexcen (21 August 2018)

is energy cost that out of whack? look what you have plugged in now at home. 

where working today the house next door had 4 reverse air cons hooked up. probably 40sq house.


----------



## overhang (21 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> No actually I was only suggesting they build a Power Station, to ensure you guys over East have a reasonably reliable reasonably priced electricity system, being in W.A I really don't give a ratz Ar$e.
> Best of luck.




Well its good of you to commit your tax payer $ to the cause


----------



## PZ99 (21 August 2018)

Toyota Lexcen said:


> is energy cost that out of whack? look what you have plugged in now at home.
> 
> where working today the house next door had 4 reverse air cons hooked up. probably 40sq house.



Watch what happens when summer arrives and records get warped again like last year and the one before that


----------



## Smurf1976 (21 August 2018)

Toyota Lexcen said:


> is energy cost that out of whack?



For business it can be a big issue.

The bigger concern though is things falling in a heap in a physical sense. With all the political uncertainty there's not a lot of willingness to invest and the situation is getting rather stretched.


----------



## sptrawler (21 August 2018)

overhang said:


> Well its good of you to commit your tax payer $ to the cause




Just playing the white man, jeez forgot you can't say that. 

Snowy2 and Tassie upgrade won't happen by 2026, you can bet on that.
But a lot of coal fired generation, will be shut down or broken down, by 2026.

The real problem is no one is going to replace it, what a hoot, silly Billy will wear it big time.
But as someone wiser than me said, something has to happen, before anything will happen.


----------



## SirRumpole (21 August 2018)

overhang said:


> why Japan pay less for our gas than we pay, why the US gas price is almost half as much as ours.




And why we are the only gas exporting country that does not have a domestic reservation scheme.


----------



## sptrawler (21 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> And why we are the only gas exporting country that does not have a domestic reservation scheme.



Western Australia does.


----------



## Tisme (21 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> And why we are the only gas exporting country that does not have a domestic reservation scheme.




To make high profit renewables more imperatively palatable to the doomsayers?


----------



## Junior (22 August 2018)

overhang said:


> Turnbull already made a huge concession to the right in the party by axing the emissions reduction target.  But listening to Craig Kelly on the radio today and they want more, he basically insinuated that they want a coal power station built.  That is the ideology that Turnbull is confronted with, some on the right have even suggested the government should subsidise the commissioning of one.




This fixation on building a new Coal plant is very strange to me.  Why the obsession??  There's no magic solution to bringing power prices down, it's a complex issue.  It seems the obsession with Coal is purely driven by trying to pi55 off the rest of us who actually give two sh!ts about the environment.  There's a hundred ways to generate power and coal is the dirtiest and not even the cheapest!!

We voted a Turnbull led Government into power, it's sad they can't get behind him now and see if they can knock Shorten off at the coming election.  I just can't see that voters will support yet another leadership change so close to the end of the current term.

Most Aussies are sick of these morons infighting and talking about themselves.  Do your job and govern!!


----------



## IFocus (22 August 2018)

The conservatives have for some time cast more influence than their numbers in the Libs, throw in the  Nats and you have a real snake pit.

Australia wont cop a truly conservative government you have to govern from the middle Howard got found out with "work non choices" etc.

Maybe this is the wash out Australia needs to get back to the middle Ala Hawk/Keating 10 years of conservative non policy on energy and its a complete mess.

BTW renewables are now much cheaper for dispatchable power than coal you wont read that in conservative rags.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

Junior said:


> This fixation on building a new Coal plant is very strange to me.  Why the obsession??




I guess it is like double entry accounting, why? 
There is probably a very good reason to use it, and I just don't know enough about the subject, to understand it.
The interconnected power grid is a bit like that, a lot of people have a lot to say about it, but know sod all about it. IMO


----------



## SirRumpole (22 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> The interconnected power grid is a bit like that, a lot of people have a lot to say about it, but know sod all about it. IMO




That's why we've got Smurf.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> That's why we've got Smurf.



Your spot on there, but as usual people only take from what he says, what they want to hear.


----------



## fiftyeight (22 August 2018)

https://www.news.com.au/finance/wor...a/news-story/2626e417ac7df0fdde4778959e818353

Sums up my thoughts pretty well.

Anyone my age or younger actually knows nothing other than this BS. The talent pool for future politicians will be very small. What gen-Y or millennial would want to enter politics after witnessing this constant BS


----------



## Tisme (22 August 2018)

Junior said:


> This fixation on building a new Coal plant is very strange to me.  Why the obsession??




They can touch it, they can see it, it has huge grunt 24/7, it runs on a 24/7 fuel, private enterprise is focusing on renewables at cost to the consumer and govt controls, it offers price competition to oligopolies, etc.

In short they want a low tech reliable V8 that doesn't react to the whims of the gouging investor market and multinationals. They want to be modern day Chifleys.

And they know it's politically attractive to many voters.


----------



## Tisme (22 August 2018)

"SENATE SPEECH "The people are over it. They’re tired of every single one of you urinating their money up against a brick wall. If they could bang your heads against the same wall they would" @PaulineHansonOz"


----------



## SirRumpole (22 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> "SENATE SPEECH "The people are over it. They’re tired of every single one of you urinating their money up against a brick wall. If they could bang your heads against the same wall they would" @PaulineHansonOz"





Pretty close.


----------



## Junior (22 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> In short they want a low tech reliable V8 that doesn't react to the whims of the gouging investor market and multinationals. They want to be modern day Chifleys.




Right Now, we have the means and resources to generate electricity in a way that is far cleaner, and cheaper, than digging up and burning coal.  They've worked it out in Europe.  Even China is aggressively expanding their renewable energy capability and pulling back on investment into fossil fuels.  Regardless of Trump trying to kill the concept, California and some other parts of the US are on board.

It's sad that it is a political issue, where some people have to choose which political football team they support, and then either be for or against Coal power as an extension of that.

How f*cking dumb are our politicians who cannot see that the writing is on the wall when it comes to this stuff.  The technology is there; invest in it, build it and move on!  We're only delaying the inevitable.


----------



## PZ99 (22 August 2018)

I think we should dig up as much coal as we can and sell it off to pay for renewable energy.

And that's not a green viewpoint - it's a sustainability one.


----------



## Tisme (22 August 2018)

Junior said:


> It's sad that it is a political issue, where some people have to choose which political football team they support, and then either be for or against Coal power as an extension of that.
> 
> How f*cking dumb are our politicians who cannot see that the writing is on the wall when it comes to this stuff.  The technology is there; invest in it, build it and move on!  We're only delaying the inevitable.




Politcal football teams are for knuckleheads, but when we only have a choice of a Sherrin, Burley, Lyrebird, Kookaburra, Chesson, Buffalo that have very minor product discimination, we tend to defend the brand once committed.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

Junior said:


> Right Now, we have the means and resources to generate electricity in a way that is far cleaner, and cheaper, than digging up and burning coal.  They've worked it out in Europe.  Even China is aggressively expanding their renewable energy capability and pulling back on investment into fossil fuels.  Regardless of Trump trying to kill the concept, California and some other parts of the US are on board.
> 
> It's sad that it is a political issue, where some people have to choose which political football team they support, and then either be for or against Coal power as an extension of that.
> 
> How f*cking dumb are our politicians who cannot see that the writing is on the wall when it comes to this stuff.  The technology is there; invest in it, build it and move on!  We're only delaying the inevitable.




The issue isn't the lack of wanting to go renewable's, it is the ability to do it in a controlled manner.
Taking one of smurph's posts to try and highlight the problem.
The interconnected grid load was 23,000MW, of that 66% was being supplied by coal, 10% wind, 10% hydro, gas 7% and solar 5%(rounding).
A few hours later the sun had gone down solar was producing nothing, and the load had gone up to 30,000MW.
Now to break that down about 20,000MW is produced by coal.
Snowy 2 will add about 2,000MW and Tassie upgrade will add about 5,000MW apparently.
So even with them added, there is still a shortfall of about 13,000MW of base load generation required and it is not just required when the sun is shinning.

So at the moment there is about 8,000MW of solar installed in Australia, that is taking into account everything that has been put in.
So to to put that in context, you would require twice as much and more(to allow for bad weather), plus storage just to match the requirement. That's on a good day.

S.A is building the biggest solar salt storage Power Station in the World, it will be 150MW at a cost of $650million, it will have storage for 8hrs running that is if it hasn't been running.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/com...er-renewable-world-first-20180110-p4yyd7.html

We have about 4,500MW of wind farms in Australia and they are very good, but as with solar, they only produce when the wind is blowing.

*So in reality how will we get the 20,000MW shortfall of reliable, when you want it,power installed*.
At this point we can't, but meanwhile the Generation Companies are running down the coal fired Stations, and no one is replacing it.
It might sound wonderful and saving the planet, but when the reality hits, it may well be past the point of having time to sort it.
Then when everyone is sitting there in the dark, they will be saying, how the fluck did this happen.
The load is going up not down, and the Power Stations are getting older, as smurph points out, just do the math's on it.
You're an accountant, it really is just maths, I think the system will fail before it gets sorted. Snowy 2 and Tassie upgrade will help, but by the time they are finished, load growth and plant shutdowns will have absorbed more than their output. Just my opinion.


----------



## Junior (22 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> The issue isn't the lack of wanting to go renewable's, it is the ability to do it in a controlled manner.
> Taking one of smurph's posts to try and highlight the problem.
> The interconnected grid load was 23,000MW, of that 66% was being supplied by coal, 10% wind, 10% hydro, gas 7% and solar 5%(rounding).
> A few hours later the sun had gone down solar was producing nothing, and the load had gone up to 30,000MW.
> ...




No doubt, it is complicated and challenging.  But it surely can be done without the need to build a new Coal plant.  Especially when we have a vast land with abundant sun, wind and other resources to exploit.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

Junior said:


> No doubt, it is complicated and challenging.  But it surely can be done without the need to build a new Coal plant.  Especially when we have a vast land with abundant sun, wind and other resources to exploit.



Like I said, just do the maths.
Not only would *every *solar installation that has been put in, have to have a battery fitted, probably four times as much is required(because installed capacity, is on a good day) and they will need batteries.
It is going to take 50 years IMO, to get to a position where we can rely on renewable's, the problem is everyone thinks it is just a case of wishing it and it becomes true.
The reality is until then we still require reliable power, but no one is installing it, and what we do have is getting old and breaking down.
It can't end well, but probably Labor know the issue, they just aren't addressing it untill they need to. Which actually is the smart thing to do, when things get dire if they are in office, they will just say unfortunately we have no option but to build this station.
Meanwhile they let the Libs thrash around fighting everyone, while trying to do the sensible thing, it would be much more intelligent to take Labors approach.
When rolling blackouts are the call of the day, people will soon demand a station be put in, by that time industry will well and truly have had a gutfull of Australia and its hit and miss power system.
The only other technology that can get us over this time hurdle is nuclear, it's clean, it's costly, it's frightening, but it is the only source of clean energy that is big enough at this time.
Like I said, only my opinion, I really don't care either way.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

I think Turnbull, needs to worry more about Morrison than Dutton, who ever leads the Libs is only going to get a short tenure anyway, after the next election the cards will be re shuffled in the LNP.
My guess is Morrison is keeping his powder dry, there is no point in fighting, to grab the wooden spoon.
Dutton is as popular as a fart in a phone box, so even if he wins, the popularity polls will kill him.IMO


----------



## fiftyeight (22 August 2018)

Junior said:


> No doubt, it is complicated and challenging.  But it surely can be done without the need to build a new Coal plant.  Especially when we have a vast land with abundant sun, wind and other resources to exploit.




Some smart people put this together 8 years ago

http://media.bze.org.au/ZCA2020_Stationary_Energy_Report_v1.pdf


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

fiftyeight said:


> Some smart people put this together 8 years ago
> 
> http://media.bze.org.au/ZCA2020_Stationary_Energy_Report_v1.pdf




*Yes, another great sales brochure, big on promise short on fact*.
This was all supposed to be feasible and available 10 years ago, according to the blurb and could be installed and running by 2020.

From section 3:
_60% of Australia's power would be supplied by Concentrated Solar Thermal (cst) Power Plants (molten salt storage), located over 12 sites in strategic locations for solar generation.
The Plan proposes 3,500 MW of CST capacity to be installed near each of the 12 towns shown in Figure 3.2. Each site is primarily made up of “Solar 220” generating units, which have a net output of 217 MW each._

*Now for the 2020 reality, remember these are meant to be up and running, all gas and coal shut down.*

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/...4-hour-renewable-energy-crescent-dunes-nevada

From the article, this is the reality as of 2018 :

_What people are actually seeing is a 110-megawatt concentrated solar power (CSP) plant, built and operated by SolarReserve of Santa Monica, California. It's not from outer space, but there's not yet anything quite like it of this size anywhere else on the planet. 

SolarReserve is trying to prove that the technology that drives Crescent Dunes can make solar power an affordable, carbon-free, day-and-night energy source, dispatched on the electric grid like any fossil fuel plant. Here, concentrated sunlight heats molten salt to 1,050 degrees Fahrenheit in that shimmering tower; then the salt gets stored in a giant insulated tank and can be tapped to make steam to run a turbine.
If this plant and several similar facilities under construction, or soon to be, prove reliable, the technology is poised to take off. Solar photovoltaic (PV) panels can displace fossil fuels during the day, and wind turbines can do the same as long as it's windy. But molten salt towers may be able to meet the challenge of electricity on demand, and push more older, dirtier fossil-fuel plants into retirement.

The price of the power generated at SolarReserve's second plant, to be built near Port Augusta, Australia, will be less than half that of the electricity produced by Crescent Dunes—about 7.8 cents (Australian) per kilowatt-hour, or just over 6 U.S. cents. When the South Australia government signed the contract to buy the plant's output in August, the state's treasurer, Tom Koutsantonis, tweeted that a "shiver has just gone up the coal generation industry's spine," because a new coal plant can't match that price.

Kevin Smith, chief executive officer of SolarReserve, believes Crescent Dunes shows that the technology works and the next projects on the books will prove out the economics. The company has a third plant moving forward in South Africa and has plans for 10 more CSP towers in Nevada to serve California's needs.

"We're going to see it through," said Smith of the effort to gain acceptance for this type of generation. He helped build the company Invenergy into one of the largest owners of U.S. wind farms before joining SolarReserve at its founding in 2008. "It's taken a while to get to where we are. The market is now responding. We've got our costs down. We're winning bids."_


So in reality, it is still experimental and being proven, yet your article would have us believe we could have been building them 10 years ago.
Like you said, very intelligent people, at roping people in. IMO


----------



## PZ99 (22 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I think Turnbull, needs to worry more about Morrison than Dutton, who ever leads the Libs is only going to get a short tenure anyway, after the next election the cards will be re shuffled in the LNP.
> My guess is Morrison is keeping his powder dry, there is no point in fighting, to grab the wooden spoon.
> Dutton is as popular as a fart in a phone box, so even if he wins, the popularity polls will kill him.IMO



Yep, tend to agree. Newspoll out on Monday. Any bets? 56-44 for ALP ?

Meanwhile...


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Yep, tend to agree. Newspoll out on Monday. Any bets? 56-44 for ALP ?
> 
> Meanwhile...





Yep as usual, the media trying to get dirt on Abbott, they are obsessed with him.
The good thing about it is, the rest of the Libs get Parliament time, without the constant media harassment.
I guess he is taking one for the team.
Which should stand them in good stead, after the next term of Government, the Libs interchange bench looks a lot stronger than Labors.
Anyway as Tony said,"the circus goes on".


----------



## fiftyeight (22 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> *Yes, another great sales brochure, big on promise short on fact*.
> This was all supposed to be feasible and available 10 years ago, according to the blurb and could be installed and running by 2020.
> 
> From section 3:
> ...




I have no issue striving for a stretch goal and failing by a few years maybe 10. What I do have an issue with is the BS situation we are in now.

There is no perfect green solution, but that does not mean we should build more coal as a stop gap. We are a lucky successful nation. We should take risks and push the technological boundaries and be world leaders instead of the laggards we have become


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

fiftyeight said:


> Some smart people put this together 8 years ago
> 
> http://media.bze.org.au/ZCA2020_Stationary_Energy_Report_v1.pdf




I was just thinking, this rubbish is the very reason everyone including intelligent people, think that carbon free power is or should be available.

The problem is the media believe it, and if they believe it they publish it, then it becomes "fact".
Is there any wonder, we can't have a sensible debate, about a controlled move to renewable's.
The media has a lot to answer for, they should be asking the question "how do we replace our base load generation", not just re printing salesman's waffle.


----------



## fiftyeight (22 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I was just thinking, this rubbish is the very reason everyone including intelligent people, think that carbon free power is or should be available.




This received very little attention as far as I can remember (I was partying a lot more back then though)

I am quite happy to defer to people like smurf and other much smarter people. However I highly doubt the LNP, ALP or the Greens are those people


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

fiftyeight said:


> I have no issue striving for a stretch goal and failing by a few years maybe 10. What I do have an issue with is the BS situation we are in now.
> 
> There is no perfect green solution, but that does not mean we should build more coal as a stop gap. We are a lucky successful nation. We should take risks and push the technological boundaries and be world leaders instead of the laggards we have become




That isn't a stretched goal, it is blatant miss information, which is half the problem.

If people such as yourself, took responsibility for the outcomes, you wouldn't be so prepared to take the risk. What really galls me, is the fact you don't put up the facts, as well as the BS.
All you do is miss lead the general population, with ridiculous garbage, that causes angst.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

fiftyeight said:


> This received very little attention as far as I can remember (I was partying a lot more back then though)
> 
> I am quite happy to defer to people like smurf and other much smarter people. However I highly doubt the LNP, ALP or the Greens are those people




Your post was headlined, as being presented by smarter people, it seems defering means absconding responsibility for posting. 
It may be best to research, before posting.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

fiftyeight said:


> I have no issue striving for a stretch goal and failing by a few years maybe 10. What I do have an issue with is the BS situation we are in now.
> 
> There is no perfect green solution, but that does not mean we should build more coal as a stop gap. We are a lucky successful nation. We should take risks and push the technological boundaries and be world leaders instead of the laggards we have become




Didn't you read the post, S.A is building the biggest molten salt generator in the World and it is still experimental. 
We are pushing the boundaries, are you suggesting pushing the boundaries while sitting in the dark, would be better? FFS


----------



## Smurf1976 (22 August 2018)

So far as energy an indeed all infrastructure is concerned, my view is that it should never have come to the point where mention of power stations and changing the Prime Minister in the same sentence actually makes sense to anyone.

Electricity should be something that just gets done. The only people needing to worry about it should be those working in the industry. Beyond that, well if someone has an interest in science and engineering stuff and wants to know about it or they want to bring their kids along to a power station open day and show them how things like that work then sure, that's fine let's show them, but it shouldn't be something that's an actual problem for the nation.

It just shouldn't be that everyone from accountants to farmers are giving at least some thought to whether or not they can afford to turn the lights on. Likewise nobody should need to contemplate that turning on their air-conditioner might black out the neighbours.

It just shouldn't have come to this and that is has is 100% the creation of politicians on all sides. If I was to single anyone out though it would be actually not be an Australian since the ideology that everything ought to be financialised does not originate from Australia, we just copied it, and is the primary root cause of where we're at now. 

Perhaps to the surprise of some I'll mention former Greens leader Bob Brown as one of the few people I've met who I'm very sure does "get it" that it's a flawed approach. I don't agree with him on many of the details of what to do about it but environmentalists had certainly cottoned on to what was really happening long before most. Credit where it's due.

The same could be said for other things like transport. The trains should just work, we should have competent and adequately resourced people to make sure that happens, and we shouldn't have ministers overriding sound decision making and leading to poor or even dangerous things being done with the roads .

Put some doctors in charge of hospitals, some engineers in charge of power and railways, give some proper respect to people like scientists and their profession, and then we'll stop having these problems.


----------



## moXJO (22 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> That isn't a stretched goal, it is blatant miss information, which is half the problem.
> 
> If people such as yourself, took responsibility for the outcomes, you wouldn't be so prepared to take the risk. What really galls me, is the fact you don't put up the facts, as well as the BS.
> All you do is miss lead the general population, with ridiculous garbage, that causes angst.



Welcome to 2018.

Renewables ain't there yet imo. Between lifespan, cost and reliability (bar hydro) it ain't going to cut it.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

moXJO said:


> Welcome to 2018.
> 
> Renewables ain't there yet imo. Between lifespan, cost and reliability (bar hydro) it ain't going to cut it.




Hallelujah, a light in the wilderness.


----------



## Smurf1976 (22 August 2018)

As an analogy, the technical difficulties in using renewables could be compared to the weather by saying that an average day in Adelaide is fine with a top of 22 degrees. Statistically that is correct, 22.4 if you want to be precise. Sounds nice.

Simply looking at that data only you could easily conclude that homes in Adelaide do not require heating or cooling and that the climate is just about perfect.

Now if you have ever lived in or even visited Adelaide you will be well aware that most days aren't average and that in truth the city commonly experiences both hot and cold weather, indeed there aren't actually many days at all where it's about 22 degrees and fine.

Wind and solar energy are much the same. Very rarely are they "just right" or even average. In practice it's a feast or famine thing most of the time. Wind supplied just 2.4% of electricity in the National Electricity Market during today's demand peak, solar was zero at the same time, but now wind's up to 5.9% and rising (although the vast majority of that wind power at the moment is being produced in SA).

Can all this be made to work? Yes, I'm very sure it can be done. Diverse geographic locations for the wind and solar generation, pumped hydro, some batteries, scientifically based control of it and a strong grid to tie it all together = a working system. It's far more complex than just building stuff and thinking it'll work though. Just like investing is far more complex than just buying 20 random shares and contemplating what sort of island to buy when you're worth $ billions.


----------



## So_Cynical (22 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> So far as energy an indeed all infrastructure is concerned, my view is that it should never have come to the point where mention of power stations and changing the Prime Minister in the same sentence actually makes sense to anyone.
> 
> Electricity should be something that just gets done.




That's it in a nut shell, these idiots politicised good sense, they made the inevitable a political issue, power generation needed to undertake a 40 - 50 year transition away from coal and 30 years after this was obvious we still have nothing in place - i mean drop the GST on power to bring bills down is the best they can do..

The LNP is pretty much split 50/50, remember Tony won that vote against Malcolm by 1 vote..and about a decade later here we are again, half the LNP are hard core deniers, the others have no hope of bringing them along, thus we have the LNP imploding.


----------



## fiftyeight (22 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> Can all this be made to work? Yes, I'm very sure it can be done. Diverse geographic locations for the wind and solar generation, pumped hydro, some batteries, scientifically based control of it and a strong grid to tie it all together = a working system. It's far more complex than just building stuff and thinking it'll work though. Just like investing is far more complex than just buying 20 random shares and contemplating what sort of island to buy when you're worth $ billions.




Extremely complex problem with no silver bullet. Hopefully we do not have another decade of zero action and the correct people are finally invited to the table


----------



## moXJO (22 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> . It's far more complex than just building stuff and thinking it'll work though. Just like investing is far more complex than just buying 20 random shares and contemplating what sort of island to buy when you're worth $ billions.



This seems to be the current problem. Just tack **** on to the grid. Or add more solar to roofs. 

A total overhaul would be a massive project. And also very needed.  
But are australian governments even capable of getting it done these days.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

So_Cynical said:


> That's it in a nut shell, these idiots politicised good sense, they made the inevitable a political issue, power generation needed to undertake a 40 - 50 year transition away from coal and 30 years after this was obvious we still have nothing in place - i mean drop the GST on power to bring bills down is the best they can do..




You pretty well hit it in a nutshell, priceless just priceless.


----------



## PZ99 (22 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> Can all this be made to work? Yes, I'm very sure it can be done. Diverse geographic locations for the *wind and solar generation, pumped hydro, some batteries*, scientifically based control of it and a strong grid to tie it all together = a working system.



That's exactly what I've been advocating. The only thing holding it back is lack of funding - hence the idea of exporting more coal rather than just burning it.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

PZ99 said:


> That's exactly what I've been advocating. The only thing holding it back is lack of funding - hence the idea of exporting more coal rather than just burning it.



Ask smurph, what would be a sensible time frame to accomplish it in.

But your idea of flogging off the coal is spot on, we are in a better position than most Countries, to convert to renewable's(other than those with huge mountains, small Country = heaps of hydro).


----------



## PZ99 (22 August 2018)

Definitely decades, no illusions about the time frame at all


----------



## Smurf1976 (22 August 2018)

fiftyeight said:


> Hopefully we do not have another decade of zero action



We'll be in an outright major crisis by that time if nothing changes.

I posted a list in another thread but there's simply so much old stuff that's wearing out whilst still being relied upon that it's only a matter of time until something breaks in a big way.

It's one of those things where nobody can predict exactly which bits will fail at what moment but it's easy to see that if you've got complex machinery that's old and tired then it's only a matter of time until things fail. The only bit that's hard to foresee is the detail of what happens when but the ultimate outcome is very obvious.


----------



## fiftyeight (22 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> We'll be in an outright major crisis by that time if nothing changes.
> 
> I posted a list in another thread but there's simply so much old stuff that's wearing out whilst still being relied upon that it's only a matter of time until something breaks in a big way.
> 
> It's one of those things where nobody can predict exactly which bits will fail at what moment but it's easy to see that if you've got complex machinery that's old and tired then it's only a matter of time until things fail. The only bit that's hard to foresee is the detail of what happens when but the ultimate outcome is very obvious.




Just like my old Corolla, not sure what is about to break but I know it will be something soon. 

Working on a large gas plant I see every day the time and planning that goes into running complex systems. As you keep saying, leave it to the experts!!!

I dont think anyone is expecting building to commence tomorrow but this should all have been figured out years ago. And possibly on the way to a greener future money would need to spent on coal. Nothing wrong with that if it fit in to a plan. 

I just want a plan and I have no idea where that will come from at the moment.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> We'll be in an outright major crisis by that time if nothing changes.
> 
> I posted a list in another thread but there's simply so much old stuff that's wearing out whilst still being relied upon that it's only a matter of time until something breaks in a big way.
> 
> It's one of those things where nobody can predict exactly which bits will fail at what moment but it's easy to see that if you've got complex machinery that's old and tired then it's only a matter of time until things fail. The only bit that's hard to foresee is the detail of what happens when but the ultimate outcome is very obvious.




What happens smurph is a complete meltdown of discipline, the Government of the day says fix it, we don't give a $hit what it costs, just fix it (been there done that).

That's the problem with the debate at the moment, it is all touchy touchy feely feely, when the poo hits the fan, the general public just wants electricity.

The LNP are preempting the problem and ways to mitigate the transition, Labor are playing to the ideological/Green we will make a bigger commitment vote, even though they can't deliver.
But who cares, as long as it wins votes, worry about the job when you've got it. 
Untill then it is just blowing smoke up your nether regions.


----------



## Smurf1976 (22 August 2018)

fiftyeight said:


> I just want a plan and I have no idea where that will come from at the moment.



For what it's worth there was a plan being hatched circa 1990 involving NSW, Vic, SA and Tas until all the politics came along.

This was something done by engineers with knowledge and approval of senior management of the state electricity authorities. There were also various others involved including proper consideration of environmental issues both CO2 and others.

It was never finalised in detail but the basic elements were:

Join Tas to Vic (done eventually). Bearing in mind SA had just been joined to Vic only months earlier, this would lead to a combined NSW, ACT, Vic, SA, Tas system that could be operated more efficiently than separate smaller systems. The idea that Qld might eventually also join it was also there but wasn't part of the plan as such (has since been done though).

No more conventional coal-fired plant built but a new coal-fired plant designed specifically to operate intermittently and cope with varying loads across the states in an efficient manner would be built instead. It was never built. 

Next step would be a large capacity gas-fired plant able to rapidly change output whilst retaining efficiency. As with the coal plant this would serve the needs of all connected states. It was never built.

Next would be pumped storage and renewables noting that sites for the pumped storage facilities had already been identified in NSW, Vic and SA and that wind and solar monitoring had already been set up too.

So engineers and others were certainly thinking about an orderly, staged approach to the problem quite some time ago (this was circa 1991). They didn't get to the point of detailed timing before all that sort of planning was disbanded amidst the politics of the era but the "how" aspect was certainly being progressed in a staged manner.


----------



## Smurf1976 (22 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> That's the problem with the debate at the moment, it is all touchy touchy feely feely, when the poo hits the fan, the general public just wants electricity.



I see a future involving diesel.

The ultimate stupidity since oil is the one energy resource we're mostly reliant on imports for but it's a reality that setting up even a thousand diesel generators is quicker than anything else so a very likely outcome in practice. Not a good outcome but I can foresee it happening.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> For what it's worth there was a plan being hatched circa 1990 involving NSW, Vic, SA and Tas until all the politics came along.
> 
> This was something done by engineers with knowledge and approval of senior management of the state electricity authorities. There were also various others involved including proper consideration of environmental issues both CO2 and others.
> 
> ...




FFS where are they now, that is what happens when the media, the politicians and the gullible public, stuff up a good plan.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> I see a future involving diesel.
> 
> The ultimate stupidity since oil is the one energy resource we're mostly reliant on imports for but it's a reality that setting up even a thousand diesel generators is quicker than anything else so a very likely outcome in practice. Not a good outcome but I can foresee it happening.



Been there done that.
Problem mining company, "we can't supply the Town any more, it isn't or responsibility".

Government to manager, "the Town will be switched off in x weeks, fix it".

Manager to plebs, "Get whatever gensets we have mounted to trucks, and on site in x weeks".

Plebs to Manager, " we have just enough diesel gensets, but they have different voltage alternators and we don't have compatible transformers".

Manager to plebs, "Don't give me excuses, give me results'.

Manager out!!! lol

Next phase, temporary installation replacement, with permanent installation.

Manager to plebs, " Is unit one running"?

Plebs, "Yes it is synchronised to the system, but we have just commissioned it and any failure will take 20 minutes for an air re-start".

Manager to plebs, "a line crew will be there tommorrow, to cut the mine feed to the town".

Plebs to Manager, " you must be ffing joking"

Manager, "No"

The thing I find funny, is all these people on the internet, who think they have a clue. lol


----------



## SirRumpole (22 August 2018)

Turnbull had the sense to commission a highly regarded scientist and engineer called Alan Finkel to produce recommendations on the future of our electricity market.

He decided to accept all but one recommendation and the whole thing fell apart. Labor said they would implement all of it including the emmissions intensity provisions, but because that offended the Libs Right wing the whole thing has stalled.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Turnbull should have accepted the whole lot with the agreement of Labor if necessary, but he decided it wasn't worth his job. His gutlessness has contributed to the black hole in energy policy that we have now and a five year delay in getting any solution to the problem.


----------



## sptrawler (22 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Turnbull had the sense to commission a highly regarded scientist and engineer called Alan Finkel to produce recommendations on the future of our electricity market.
> 
> He decided to accept all but one recommendation and the whole thing fell apart. Labor said they would implement all of it including the emmissions intensity provisions, but because that offended the Libs Right wing the whole thing has stalled.
> 
> ...




Well Rumpy, I'm sure you will get your wish with a Labor Government, I hope they do a better job than this lot.
But we LNP supporters did say, Turnbull would be a disaster, didn't we?

In W.A I must say, Labor haven't trashed the previous Governments initiatives, which is a plus.
Also they have adopted a sensible approach to running the show, I've been pleasantly surprised, they have been very similar to Barnett.
Measured approach, demand a fair deal on the GST, and keep upgrading infrastructure.


----------



## Smurf1976 (22 August 2018)

If the media reports are accurate then it seems Dutton's having another go as early as tomorrow.

As for the energy stuff, well the big problem I'm seeing is that time has run out so far as the best options are concerned and if we keep going down this track then there will end up being no time left in which to do anything at all or at least not anything which doesn't involve lots of diesels housed in shipping containers.

That, diesels in containers hooked up to the grid, is what you do when there's an unexpected infrastructure failure or some sort of natural disaster. It's not what anyone sensibly plans to do that's for sure. We already import somewhere around $1 billion worth of petroleum fuels every fortnight so of all possible resources we could use to generate power, anything produced from oil is surely the least sensible choice.

In defence of the private energy companies though - well would you invest big $ with all this policy uncertainty going on around you? Not many would.


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> If the media reports are accurate then it seems Dutton's having another go as early as tomorrow.
> 
> As for the energy stuff, well the big problem I'm seeing is that time has run out so far as the best options are concerned and if we keep going down this track then there will end up being no time left in which to do anything at all or at least not anything which doesn't involve lots of diesels housed in shipping containers.
> 
> That, diesels in containers hooked up to the grid, is what you do when there's an unexpected infrastructure failure or some sort of natural disaster. It's not what anyone sensibly plans to do that's for sure. We already import somewhere around $1 billion worth of petroleum fuels every fortnight.




The problem with that smurph, Industry can't invest billions of dollars when they don't have a reliable power supply and putting in their own power means varying fuel costs.
Why would they bother?
This is unfortunately where Abbott was coming from, but he is the devil re incarnated according to the media, I'm no Abbott fan but what he says makes sense.
Labor are railroading the vote their way, on the carbon ticket, but from my experience through life they will do an about face when in office.
They know the problems, it just isn't worth winning the argument, when you can wait until the public want the problem fixed.
The one thing about working in the unions, you know how to work the crowd, whether your point is right or wrong. You work out what they want to hear, and give them the worst case scenario for the opposing view.
With regard Energy companies, I would be shutting down coal and getting paid to put in renewable's. Why wouldn't you?
If it goes pear shaped, the government will pay you to put in coal again, it is a win win.
Diesels in containers might work in Tassie, I don't think they will work in Sydney, Melbourne. 
Maybe Walgett, Dubbo.


----------



## fiftyeight (23 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> In W.A I must say, Labor haven't trashed the previous Governments initiatives




They trashed Roe 8 which pi55es me off no end every time I am stuck in traffic trying to get to the freeway. See im not just a left greenie, finish clearing Beeliar wetlands and hurry up and build Roe 8


----------



## Tisme (23 August 2018)

moXJO said:


> This seems to be the current problem. Just tack **** on to the grid. Or add more solar to roofs.
> 
> A total overhaul would be a massive project. And also very needed.
> But are australian governments even capable of getting it done these days.




That **** they tack on .... when was the last time you saw your neighbour carry out maintenance on his solar panels, even wash them?  My feel is that gradual degradation of distributed renewables is going to be an issue in the equation of economies of scale.


----------



## explod (23 August 2018)

This thread is about the Liberal Government.

They are currently in a civil war.  How about some back on topic.

Tune in to ABC 24 now.


----------



## Tisme (23 August 2018)

explod said:


> This thread is about the Liberal Government.
> 
> They are currently in a civil war.  How about some back on topic.
> 
> Tune in to ABC 24 now.




The spill is because of the NEG disagreement


----------



## SirRumpole (23 August 2018)

We need an election ASAP.

This government is cr@p whoever is in charge.

Drain the swamp and let the people decide.


----------



## Macquack (23 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> If the media reports are accurate then it seems Dutton's having another go as early as tomorrow.



I don't get it. Doesn't a commitment to a leader last at least 24 hours.


----------



## PZ99 (23 August 2018)

Yeah - I reckon Dutton should join a union


----------



## SirRumpole (23 August 2018)

Will be interesting to see if Turnbull refers Dutton to the High Court before he gets thrown out.


----------



## CanOz (23 August 2018)

That Dutton is a self centered a$$hole. No one is Australia would vote for a jerk like that. 

I feel bad for uncle Mal...he's not hard-line conservative, he's just right for my liking. Seems a common sense sort of bloke, compared to the alternatives


----------



## moXJO (23 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> That **** they tack on .... when was the last time you saw your neighbour carry out maintenance on his solar panels, even wash them?  My feel is that gradual degradation of distributed renewables is going to be an issue in the equation of economies of scale.



Oppps
I meant to say "they just tack **** on" thinking its going to solve the problem.


----------



## Knobby22 (23 August 2018)

I reckon Dutton's lost.
Even in today's paper Bolt calls him Abbott lite. (He also attacks the woman of the party and says they aren't good enough, too left wing and not willing to make waves and if the Libs let any more women in then they will become a party of Turnbull types.

There is a major revolt going on within the rank and file of the Liberal Party, many who are not fans of Abbott and Bolt, who can't see how this leadership change will work. if there is a change it will be when Parliament resumes in two weeks and it will be someone else more suitable. This effort to create a USA style Republican Party from the Menzian philosophy Liberal Party is not going to go smoothly as there are too many decent people within the party.


----------



## IFocus (23 August 2018)

A couple of good articles about the Libs and Duttons GST plan 

"The good thing about politicians suddenly having leadership aspirations is that they often reveal quite quickly whether or not they are up for the job. It took Peter Dutton one interview outlining his plan to lower electricity costs to demonstrate that his being anywhere near the prime ministership would be disastrous for our economy."

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...of-political-desperation-and-policy-stupidity


The lack of policies at the heart of this insurrection shows it isn’t about preserving the party as a broad church: it’s about following the global trend towards the far right

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...-if-it-just-panders-to-an-ever-narrowing-base


----------



## moXJO (23 August 2018)

CanOz said:


> That Dutton is a self centered a$$hole. No one is Australia would vote for a jerk like that.



I know... right?

Am I  missing something, or has Dutton got zero chance come election time?
I don't understand why you would do it.

And as far as polishing his image he left it way to late. If he went out kissing babies he would likely give them PTSD anyway.


----------



## PZ99 (23 August 2018)

CanOz said:


> That Dutton is a self centered a$$hole. No one is Australia would vote for a jerk like that.
> 
> I feel bad for uncle Mal...he's not hard-line conservative, he's just right for my liking. Seems a common sense sort of bloke, compared to the alternatives



Completely agree - despite all the undermining from the right Turnbull had the Coalition in a winning position against Labor as late as last week.


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2018)

fiftyeight said:


> They trashed Roe 8 which pi55es me off no end every time I am stuck in traffic trying to get to the freeway. See im not just a left greenie, finish clearing Beeliar wetlands and hurry up and build Roe 8




Don't worry, Roe 8 will go ahead, the bridge over the freeway is been built as we speak. It is just Labor aren't going to put it through the wetlands, yet, if they win the next State election my guess it will be built. It has to be. 
By the way I don't think they will clear the wetland, I think they will put a long bridge over it, Mr Smith probably knows how they will do it, he seems to be well informed regarding road infrastructure.
The ring road has to be completed, or the freeway through the city will be gridlocked. The bridges over the Roe, Tonkin and Read highways are being completed, making it a non stop 3/4 ring road.


----------



## basilio (23 August 2018)

I struggle to see how the Liberal Party can have any semblance of coherance after this debacle. The hard right conservatives and anyone else with a conscience and the capacity to understand reality (eg  CC)  will not stay together . 

It look very similar to the situation when Don Chipp left the Libs and formed the Australian Democrats.


----------



## McLovin (23 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Will be interesting to see if Turnbull refers Dutton to the High Court before he gets thrown out.




Today's Senate business...



> Business to be considered Business of the Senate notice of motion 1—Chair of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee (Senator Pratt)—Reference (Exercise of ministerial powers – visa status of au pairs)




http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo... 23 August  2018.pdf;fileType=application/pdf

Nothing can save the Libs now. I've never not voted for the Libs in the house, but not a chance I'll be voting for them with Dutton in charge.


----------



## basilio (23 August 2018)

This little skit is a great aid  to understanding the current fracas in the (remains) of the Liberal party.
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-feed/school-council-leadership-spill


----------



## Knobby22 (23 August 2018)

McLovin said:


> Today's Senate business...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I find it unbelievable.


----------



## fiftyeight (23 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Don't worry, Roe 8 will go ahead, the bridge over the freeway is been built as we speak. It is just Labor aren't going to put it through the wetlands, yet, if they win the next State election my guess it will be built. It has to be.
> By the way I don't think they will clear the wetland, I think they will put a long bridge over it, Mr Smith probably knows how they will do it, he seems to be well informed regarding road infrastructure.
> The ring road has to be completed, or the freeway through the city will be gridlocked. The bridges over the Roe, Tonkin and Read highways are being completed, making it a non stop 3/4 ring road.




Yeah just another complete waste of money going back and forth over something that will go ahead at some stage. The clearing was mostly complete and contracts signed. What a waste of $$$


----------



## basilio (23 August 2018)

Bring on the popcorn.  The Liberal party is in full implosion.  No capacity to hold a vote of confidence in Parliament. General election within 6 weeks.


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2018)

fiftyeight said:


> Yeah just another complete waste of money going back and forth over something that will go ahead at some stage. The clearing was mostly complete and contracts signed. What a waste of $$$



This is a bit off topic, but I used the Roe - Tonkin yesterday, it is unbelievable what they have doen past the airport, absolutely magic.
Anyway back to Mediocre Malcolm and commander Dutton, he must be delusional if he thinks he will get voted in.


----------



## basilio (23 August 2018)

In case you hadn't see it..
*Cormann, Fifield and Cash abandon Turnbull – politics live*
Senior ministers have tendered their resignations to the prime minister. All the day’s politics, live
https://www.theguardian.com/austral.../turnbull-dutton-liberal-canberra-chaos-spill


----------



## CanOz (23 August 2018)

If I could vote, I'd vote labor next election just to express my disgust at this....vote the bastards out I say!!!


----------



## PZ99 (23 August 2018)

Scott Morrison running ?


```
Scott Morrison will run in leadership ballot
The ABC has been told Treasurer Scott Morrison will run in a leadership ballot against Peter Dutton.

A backer of Mr Morrison's has indicated the Prime Minister will vacate his position as Liberal leader to allow the Treasurer to contest the position.
```


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Scott Morrison running ?
> 
> 
> ```
> ...




Scott Morrison, is a far better choice than Dutton, actually IMO, he is the only choice to the Libs.


----------



## basilio (23 August 2018)

Scott Morrison is certainly not Peter Dutton. He will just be an Abbot/Dutton sock puppet.


----------



## basilio (23 August 2018)

If the Liberal party wanted to make any pretence of including its broad church in the picture  Julie Bishop would be floated as PM.

It will be interesting to see if she is still Deputy after the fracas. This would be the minimal nod a new PM could make to the non Dutton/Abbotts in the party.

Any bets on the immediate return of Cory Bernardi to a New Right Liberal Party?


----------



## SirRumpole (23 August 2018)

basilio said:


> Any bets on the immediate return of Cory Bernardi to a New Right Liberal Party?




Any bets on some defections of moderates from the Liberal ranks ?


----------



## PZ99 (23 August 2018)

Most of the Govt didn't turn up to QT today. How ironic that the party that once abolished sick leave from the IR laws has taken sick leave today whilst everyday Aussies are still working


----------



## basilio (23 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Any bets on some defections of moderates from the Liberal ranks ?




Yes but where would  they go ? Labour ? Green?  One Nation ?  Reborn Australian Democrats ?


----------



## SirRumpole (23 August 2018)

basilio said:


> Yes but where would  they go ? Labour ? Green?  One Nation ?  Reborn Australian Democrats ?




Independant or a new Centre party.


----------



## CanOz (23 August 2018)

These guys really are behaving worse than a bunch of preschoolers....it disgusts me to tears to think my taxes are paying for this rubbish. I'd take their heads off if i could!


----------



## SirRumpole (23 August 2018)

CanOz said:


> These guys really are behaving worse than a bunch of preschoolers....it disgusts me to tears to think my taxes are paying for this rubbish. I'd take their heads off if i could!




That's one angry bear. 

For very good reason though, it's disgusting.


----------



## Logique (23 August 2018)

Energy policy is kryptonite to Malcolm Turnbull. And it has happened again.
A stream of deserters has been traipsing in and out of the PMs office, last night and this morning. The government has cancelled Question Time this afternoon.
Scott Morrison is rumoured to be a candidate in the likely event of another spill.


----------



## barney (23 August 2018)

Given the apparent distaste for Peter Dutton from the majority of average punters on the street that I've spoken to, it makes you wonder why the majority if Liberal pollies are seemingly happy to promote him to the King table 

Are they all that out of touch with reality or just a pack of sheep! Either way, PD as leader indicates they could all end up as lamb roast


----------



## Craton (23 August 2018)

Dutton, like Shorten will never get my vote.

Yep, worse than disgusting. Morons acting in their own self delusional interests instead of what is best for this great country and for the great unwashed therein. Idiots!


----------



## McLovin (23 August 2018)

So Mal will leave Parliament and force a by-election. I'm going to enjoy kicking the LP in the teeth at that vote. They can go f**k themselves. 

The right of the LP are so out of touch with reality. They feed on Sky News and 2GB and think that's what mainstream Australia is.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 August 2018)

McLovin said:


> So Mal will leave Parliament and force a by-election. I'm going to enjoy kicking the LP in the teeth at that vote. They can go f**k themselves.
> 
> The right of the LP are so out of touch with reality. They feed on Sky News and 2GB and think that's what mainstream Australia is.




17% margin in Wentworth to the Libs so it won't be easy for Labor to win, but not impossible.


----------



## McLovin (23 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> 17% margin in Wentworth to the Libs so it won't be easy for Labor to win, but not impossible.




Mal carries a fair bit of that vote. He is locally a pretty popular politician. When he won the seat in 2004 the margin was 5%. In the 2013 election there was no LP branding on the posters put up, because Abbott was so on the nose. Dutton is considered a joke around here.


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 August 2018)

CanOz said:


> These guys really are behaving worse than a bunch of preschoolers....it disgusts me to tears to think my taxes are paying for this rubbish. I'd take their heads off if i could!



And coming from the same party that's always keen to claw back a few cents that might have been overpaid to some pensioner or unemployed person.

Suffice to say that whilst I'd rather not have people sitting on the dole and not making an effort, those doing so are a minority and of far less concern than the massive waste or resources that's being brought about by these clowns in parliament.


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 August 2018)

McLovin said:


> The right of the LP are so out of touch with reality. They feed on Sky News and 2GB and think that's what mainstream Australia is.



Nothing I've seen leads me to think that the Liberals are here to represent the interests of the average Australian or indeed anyone not from the big end of town.

That's not to say Labor's much better but it's probable that they could at least provide us with a stable government for a while and get something done.


----------



## PZ99 (23 August 2018)

McLovin said:


> So Mal will leave Parliament and force a by-election. I'm going to enjoy kicking the LP in the teeth at that vote.
> *
> They can go f**k themselves. *



They already have. And I'm hoping the main culprit of this sorry affair will lose his seat of
Warringah at the next election. It's for that reason alone I'm putting Libs last on my vote


----------



## explod (23 August 2018)

Not surprised at Bishop emerging, the vibe of her smile had me feeling she's been lurking for a long time.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 August 2018)

explod said:


> Not surprised at Bishop emerging, the vibe of her smile had me feeling she's been lurking for a long time.




Anyone else but Dutton is going to come under pressure from the Right Wing and will be destabilised as Turnbull was. I don't think the Right will be happy with Bishop or Morrison for long.

They need a good spell on the Opposition benches to work out who they really are.


----------



## barney (23 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> *They need a good spell on the Opposition benches to work out who they really are*.




Mal Turnbull should simply resign and go and lead the Labour Party and we'd all be fine …. Ok that was a bit silly


----------



## Toyota Lexcen (23 August 2018)

The Liberals are going quite well, economy improving slowly, people have jobs


----------



## satanoperca (23 August 2018)

Toyota Lexcen said:


> The Liberals are going quite well, economy improving slowly, people have jobs



Really, where is govnuts debt vs GDP?

Hardly doing well, they just keep loading up on debt for future generations to pay off.


----------



## Tisme (23 August 2018)

satanoperca said:


> Really, where is govnuts debt vs GDP?
> 
> Hardly doing well, they just keep loading up on debt for future generations to pay off.




Tony and Cormann will merely blame Rudd, Gillard and Billy.

Midnight Express reworked :


----------



## PZ99 (23 August 2018)

Julie Bishop is going for it as well - 4 way split. 3 moderates and a far right.


----------



## moXJO (23 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> 17% margin in Wentworth to the Libs so it won't be easy for Labor to win, but not impossible.



Mal is very popular there. Libs would take a massive hit. And with Duttons views on the gay community, he would more than likely lose it for them if he becomes leader.


----------



## drsmith (23 August 2018)

Malcolm Turnbull today has bought time for alternative candidates to Peter Dutton to marshal their numbers. If Scott Morrison gets the gig, he's less likely to quit politics and force a by-election in Wentworth than if its Peter Dutton in my view.


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2018)

drsmith said:


> Malcolm Turnbull today has bought time for alternative candidates to Peter Dutton to marshal their numbers. If Scott Morrison gets the gig, he's less likely to quit politics and force a by-election in Wentworth than if its Peter Dutton in my view.



If Scott Morrison gets it, I think silly Billy will be worried.
Morrison has proven to be very calm under pressure, and copes well when put under the pump by the press.
I personally think, he would be a big step in the right direction for the Libs, seems to have the gonads for the job. IMO
I don't think Abbot, Dutton or anyone else would shout him down.
I also think Turnbull would be happy, as you suggest.
Bishop is nice, but from memory folds like a pack of cards, when the media put the pressure on.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> If Scott Morrison gets it, I think silly Billy will be worried.




Morrison is one of the best bull$hitters in Parliament, along with Turnbull.


----------



## drsmith (23 August 2018)

Morrison stopped the boats.


SirRumpole said:


> Morrison is one of the best bull$hitters in Parliament, along with Turnbull.



Morrison stopped the boats.

The first task for him, should he become leader will be to unite the party. Difficult with the conservatives given he was a supporter of MT's successful 2015 coup against TA.


----------



## drsmith (23 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> If Scott Morrison gets it, I think silly Billy will be worried.
> Morrison has proven to be very calm under pressure, and copes well when put under the pump by the press.
> I personally think, he would be a big step in the right direction for the Libs, seems to have the gonads for the job. IMO
> I don't think Abbot, Dutton or anyone else would shout him down.
> ...



Julie Bishop also doesn't have the presence in Parliament whereas Scott Morrison really served it up to Bill Shorten earlier in the week during debate on Labor's No Confidence Motion.


----------



## explod (23 August 2018)

I believe Dutton ran to open it up for others so they would not be seen as disloyal to Turnbull.  

My bet is that Bishop is the one.  A women for appeal and hopefully on their plan, the electorate will not see her as the knife holder I see.


----------



## PZ99 (23 August 2018)

drsmith said:


> Morrison stopped the boats.
> 
> The first task for him, should he become leader will be to unite the party. Difficult with the conservatives given he was a supporter of MT's successful 2015 coup against TA.



Now I know why they stopped the boats. The LNP is full of refugees with nowhere to go


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2018)

drsmith said:


> Morrison stopped the boats.




The impressive thing was, he did it with aplomb, it was a $hitty gig but he did it well.
The media, tried unsuccessfully to nail him to the wall over it, but couldn't. That took some skill.


drsmith said:


> The first task for him, should he become leader will be to unite the party. Difficult with the conservatives given he was a supporter of MT's successful 2015 coup against TA.




Yes I think Abbott had a lot of faith in Morrisson and was disappointed, but the media had made Abbott's position untenable, Morrisson did the only thing he could which was to back the change.

Hopefully Abbott realises, his job was shot and nothing could rescue it, the media are still obsessed with him. He will never get back in, and should realise his strengh's are needed in a cabinet.


----------



## explod (23 August 2018)

Toyota Lexcen said:


> The Liberals are going quite well, economy improving slowly, people have jobs



Rubbish, the new jobs are part time and on less pay.  The figures are totally fudged

The economy is on the edge too, Banks and manufacturing in  real strife, mining in the west stuffed.

Inflation is through the roof, particularly food.  Just one, peanuts, 2 years back 1 kilo $10, today, 500 gram packs $10      And could go on.


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 August 2018)

Toyota Lexcen said:


> The Liberals are going quite well, economy improving slowly, people have jobs



Increasing casualisation of the workforce and a lack of growth in full time jobs.

Lack of wages growth.

House prices.

Energy.

Immigration and gender imbalance is starting to become an issue.

They're fooling themselves if they think that "the economy" is all that matters. To them perhaps that's true but not for the masses it isn't.


----------



## IFocus (23 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> Increasing casualisation of the workforce and a lack of growth in full time jobs.
> 
> Lack of wages growth.
> 
> ...




On the money Smurf.....as always


What needs to be done, the Liberals – free market, neoliberal zealots to the last, raised on Milton Friedman mantras of deregulation and labour exploitation – will not do. *No modern government has ever held Australian wage earners in such proactive contempt.* *All of these Liberals presided over the cut to penalty rates – they were no neutral players here, their members advocated for it, just as they articulated their beliefs against maintaining minimum wages.* They’ve capped the wages of their public servants. They’ve enhanced and expanded the punishment of the unemployed. They have lauded subcontracting and casualisation as “labour market flexibility” and they’ve blithely repeated incantations to getta-betta-jobbism even when structural employment crises like their own closure of the car industry have hit communities.

*And they’ve fought an ongoing legislative war against the means by which workers win wages – the unions. There was the trade union royal commission. *The reinstatement of the ABCC. The abolition of the road safety remuneration tribunal that maintained “safe rates” of transport pay. The “registered organisations” obligations. Anti-union appointments to the Fair Work commission. Philip Lowe, the head of the Reserve Bank, has implored that wage rises now are necessary for economic stability into the future. *The Liberals do not care.*

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...minister-if-its-a-liberal-it-will-be-the-same


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> Increasing casualisation of the workforce and a lack of growth in full time jobs.
> 
> Lack of wages growth.
> 
> ...




That sums up the western world, ATM.


----------



## IFocus (23 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> That sums up the western world, ATM.




Sums up the hard right running the world at the moment..........


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2018)

IFocus said:


> Sums up the hard right running the world at the moment..........



Good to see you back and firing on the left bank of cylinders.
At least in W.A we have a sensible labor Party, I don't think you will get that with silly Billy.


----------



## IFocus (23 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Good to see you back and firing on the left bank of cylinders.
> At least in W.A we have a sensible labor Party, I don't think you will get that with silly Billy.




Haha yeah moment of weakness ...plus a couple of red wines good to see you still around to Sptrawler


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2018)

IFocus said:


> Haha yeah moment of weakness ...plus a couple of red wines good to see you still around to Sptrawler




Nothing better than having a political discussion with mates, over a couple of reds, bound to get interesting.
I'm sure you will keep us on track.


----------



## overhang (23 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> The impressive thing was, he did it with aplomb, it was a $hitty gig but he did it well.
> The media, tried unsuccessfully to nail him to the wall over it, but couldn't. That took some skill.
> 
> 
> ...




Look they did turn things around, no pun intended but I don't believe it's been as successful as the general public believe, what they excelled at was stopping the media reporting on boats.  I say this as someone who recently had a mate return from border force operations, he said enough to indicate the boats haven't stopped but it's all very hush hush, of course we wouldn't want the people smugglers working out out technique .  But make no mistake things have dried up in comparison to how they were.


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2018)

overhang said:


> Look they did turn things around, no pun intended but I don't believe it's been as successful as the general public believe, what they excelled at was stopping the media reporting on boats.  I say this as someone who recently had a mate return from border force operations, he said enough to indicate the boats haven't stopped but it's all very hush hush, of course we wouldn't want the people smugglers working out out technique .  But make no mistake things have dried up in comparison to how they were.



Perception is the name of the game, you will never stop people trying to get here, as long as most don't believe they will make it.


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> That sums up the western world, ATM.



Well yes but the point of having a government is to lead.

Biggest problem with the Coalition is they seem to think "do nothing and leave it to the market" constitutes effective government. For some things it might but for many things it doesn't.


----------



## SirRumpole (23 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> Well yes but the point of having a government is to lead.
> 
> Biggest problem with the Coalition is they seem to think "do nothing and leave it to the market" constitutes effective government. For some things it might but for many things it doesn't.




The market has functioned really well in the electricity and finance sectors.


----------



## sptrawler (23 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> Well yes but the point of having a government is to lead.
> 
> Biggest problem with the Coalition is they seem to think "do nothing and leave it to the market" constitutes effective government. For some things it might but for many things it doesn't.



That's true, but as has been proven by Labor, interfering doesn't always end up with a better outcome.
Finding the balance, between what needs fixing and what needs leaving alone, both parties seem to have a problem with. IMO
Just reading Rumpy's post below, in W.A Labor in Sept 2006 opened up the Electrical system to competition, then later disegregated the S.E.C, to stop cross subsidisation.


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Finding the balance, between what needs fixing and what needs leaving alone, both parties seem to have a problem with



I think they have trouble with the concept that something needs government doing it but that means they need to employ experts to run these things and make the decisions not that the politicians themselves need to micro-manage everything.

They're like poor managers. Doing it all themselves and making a mess, forgetting the reason why they employ people to do the work. That approach almost always ends badly in due course.


----------



## sptrawler (24 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> I think they have trouble with the concept that something needs government doing it but that means they need to employ experts to run these things and make the decisions not that the politicians themselves need to micro-manage everything.



Very true.
I've found in my working life, both Government and private industry, that Government don't seem to respect the ability of their technical staff.
Yet I have found them to be generally of a extremely high standard, in fact a lot of the staff they have let go, have become high flyers in the private sector.
It appears that politicians seem to believe, unless they pay for outside private advice, it leaves them exposed to ridicule and questioning.
When in fact on most occasions, I've found the Government departments technical ability has more in depth knowledge of the issue, than an outside consultancy firm.
I guess it goes back to the old saying, you don't appreciate advice unless you pay for it.
Things may change, I think both the Libs and Labor's old guard needs to move on, the World is changing and they are all coming over as dinosaurs.
Thrashing around over stupid issues, which the media run with untill everyone is fed up to the back teeth, the press is becoming irrelevant and the old  politicians are becoming invisible to the young people.
It is just time to kick the ball to the next generation IMO.


----------



## luutzu (24 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Very true.
> I've found in my working life, both Government and private industry, that Government don't seem to respect the ability of their technical staff.
> Yet I have found them to be generally of a extremely high standard, in fact a lot of the staff they have let go, have become high flyers in the private sector.
> It appears that politicians seem to believe, unless they pay for outside private advice, it leaves them exposed to ridicule and questioning.
> ...




Politicians know and see what you're seeing Homer. Just that if they go along with that observation, how will they and their mates make money? 

For a contractor/consultant, there's apparently this mandate now where they must go through an employment agency. I guess it's for the paperworks, insurance etc. because insurer don't offer those to private companies?

Anyway, the recruiters charges about 20 to 30% on top of the hire. You do the maths... it's crapload of cash just being handed over to the middle man. 

That and you got to drive it home that government agencies, public servants etc. are just lazy, no good slackers. That's prepping the way to privatise anything of value. 

Not saying that all specialists and external consultants are useless or not necessary. But you'd think that for massive agencies and departments, they'd in-house most of the skills they're contracting in. 

But eh, good money though.


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Very true.
> I've found in my working life, both Government and private industry, that Government don't seem to respect the ability of their technical staff.
> Yet I have found them to be generally of a extremely high standard, in fact a lot of the staff they have let go, have become high flyers in the private sector.
> It appears that politicians seem to believe, unless they pay for outside private advice, it leaves them exposed to ridicule and questioning.
> ...




A lot to do with inhouse smarts is the lack of imperatives that are otherwise placed on private enterprise employees of time, profit and individual innovation. On the flipside is the requirement for stringent bland obedience to policy and procedure within govt which is soul destroying on occasions.


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2018)

luutzu said:


> Politicians know and see what you're seeing Homer. Just that if they go along with that observation, how will they and their mates make money?
> 
> For a contractor/consultant, there's apparently this mandate now where they must go through an employment agency. I guess it's for the paperworks, insurance etc. because insurer don't offer those to private companies?
> 
> ...




Plenty of private enterprise parasites who haven't really got the smarts and knowledge to deliver what they tout. They just use nomographs or rule of thuimbs and wrap them up in pretty paper.


----------



## Tisme (24 August 2018)

Feeling hungry?

https://www.thevintagenews.com/2017...chmen-butchered-and-ate-their-prime-minister/


----------



## moXJO (24 August 2018)

I have done a lot of work for the government on big projects. And its a total cluster fk from the site manager up.
Its generally not the politicians that don't listen. Its the site managers,  architects,  main build contract managers,  public service plebs, etc.

I literally have to clonk heads together to do something the right way. When the big boss of a building firm and the politicians rock up. And I explain what needs to be done, they leave it in my hands and tell the others to back off.

They then all stand around on TV and take full credit for the work. Despite the fact I had to ram it right up em, while they argued against it.

There seems to be a lack of technical skill or vision when it comes to completing large jobs. 

Don't get me wrong there are some fantastic companies and site managers to contract to.  But its the subordinates that don't listen. The politicians have always backed me.


----------



## PZ99 (24 August 2018)

moXJO said:


> I have done a lot of work for the government on big projects. And its a total cluster fk from the site manager up.
> Its generally not the politicians that don't listen. Its the site managers,  architects,  main build contract managers,  public service plebs, etc.
> 
> I literally have to clonk heads together to do something the right way. When the big boss of a building firm and the politicians rock up. And I explain what needs to be done, they leave it in my hands and tell the others to back off.
> ...



Proves how fake it is on TV though.

The pollie takes the shovel - sticks it in the ground and runs off for a therapeutic smoko


----------



## McLovin (24 August 2018)

With the SG's advice this morning we seem to be careening toward a constitutional crisis.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 August 2018)

McLovin said:


> With the SG's advice this morning we seem to be careening toward a constitutional crisis.




Yep if Turnbull leaves and some NP's sit on the cross benches they are technically in minority government and Parliament may decide to refer Dutton to the High Court. That may persuade the Party Room to go for either Morrison or Bishop.


----------



## McLovin (24 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Yep if Turnbull leaves and some NP's sit on the cross benches they are technically in minority government and Parliament may decide to refer Dutton to the High Court. That may persuade the Party Room to go for either Morrison or Bishop.




More importantly, and where the constitutional crisis part comes into it the GG has the reserve power to commission the PM. He cannot be given formal advice, although I think he can request it. Can the GG give that commission to someone whose eligibility to sit in the house is under question?

The SG basically said he think he's OK, but..



> For those reasons I consider there to be some risk, particularly in light of the substantial size of the payments that appear to have been made by the commonwealth to RHT Investments, that the high court might conclude that there is a conflict between Mr Dutton’s duty as a parliamentarian and his personal interests


----------



## moXJO (24 August 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Proves how fake it is on TV though.
> 
> The pollie takes the shovel - sticks it in the ground and runs off for a therapeutic smoko



I had one job where the local council was at war and it was extremely toxic. We were given an impossible deadline and task. Or the labor members would have been eating sht from the libs come local election. 
When they showed me the plan I told them there were mistakes all over it.
We were told to get it done and given enough control. 

They ended up happily smiling on TV as they had managed to pull off the impossible. A lib member I knew chewed me out after that, as it put a dent in their attack.

The politics behind the scenes are often comical.


PZ99 said:


> The pollie takes the shovel - sticks it in the ground and runs off for a therapeutic smoko



This is exactly what happens. The main building contractor some high ranking public service plebs and the local members love a bit of self promotion.

Funnily enough that same member was at site almost everyday stressing because his ass was on the line.


----------



## sptrawler (24 August 2018)

There wasn't this much fanfare when Turnbull rolled Abbott. 
The SMH will be asking for a National Day of mourning, the way they are going on.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 August 2018)

McLovin said:


> The SG basically said he think he's OK, but..




He said he didn't have a lot of evidence like the deed of Dutton's trust, so it's a bit hard to make a definitive ruling. There's enough doubt for Labor to keep hammering if Dutton is elected.


----------



## dutchie (24 August 2018)

Turnbull finally spits the dummy.
Christine Foster to take over his seat of Wentworth.


----------



## moXJO (24 August 2018)

What a mess. Talk about shtting in your own nest.


----------



## sptrawler (24 August 2018)

dutchie said:


> Turnbull finally spits the dummy.
> Christine Foster to take over his seat of Wentworth.




Funny how he didn't mind, when he was holding the knife, it wasn't as though he was doing a great job in the big chair.IMO


----------



## SirRumpole (24 August 2018)

> Christine Foster to take over his seat of Wentworth.




Not necessarily, the Libs are well on the nose I reckon.


----------



## moXJO (24 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Funny how he didn't mind, when he was holding the knife, it wasn't as though he was doing a great job in the big chair.IMO



He wasn't doing anything flash. 
The new lib leader would want to roll out big plans after this.


----------



## sptrawler (24 August 2018)

moXJO said:


> He wasn't doing anything flash.
> The new lib leader would want to roll out big plans after this.




Yes it really is time to cut the crap, and get on with sorting $### out, this ridiculous electricity situation over East needs fixing.
Time both sides grew up, stopped playing politics and started telling the truth.
It really will end up in a dire situation. IMO


----------



## wayneL (24 August 2018)

Turdbull sews seeds of further discord in his exit speech. Stunningly hypocritical.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 August 2018)

wayneL said:


> Turdbull sews seeds of further discord in his exit speech. Stunningly hypocritical.




I don't blame him.

The whole thing is that the people voted him in and should be the ones to throw him out.


----------



## fiftyeight (24 August 2018)

moXJO said:


> He wasn't doing anything flash.
> The new lib leader would want to roll out big plans after this.




The Libs would want to show some leadership and actually speak to Labor and actually get something achieved. I and many other would respect that and may change a few votes. Sticking to this oppose everything BS will win no friends


----------



## IFocus (24 August 2018)

wayneL said:


> Turdbull sews seeds of further discord in his exit speech. Stunningly hypocritical.




He is an ex merchant banker would else would you have expected?


----------



## sptrawler (24 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I don't blame him.
> 
> The whole thing is that the people voted him in and should be the ones to throw him out.



Did you really say that with a straight face. Lol


----------



## SirRumpole (24 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Did you really say that with a straight face. Lol




Why not ? If people voted in what they thought was a moderate Liberal government and then got a Right wing conservative one without them voting for it, then they've been duped.


----------



## explod (24 August 2018)

The LNP are going through what Labour went through in the sixties.  Right wing religious against left wing communism.  Out of which rose the DLP.

This regime will disintegrate and will be lost for more that 20 years.

The Alp will now dominate and the growing numbers in the Greens will see them as opposition.


----------



## Smurf1976 (24 August 2018)

Suppose that you meet someone from overseas who has an interest in politics but zero knowledge of Australia in that context to the point that they couldn't name any party or politician. All they know is it's a democracy.

Now how do you explain the Liberal party? Who does it represent, what is its core ideology and so on?

Labor, Greens and Nationals are all at least partly explainable in terms of what they're about and who they at least sort-of represent. They might be a long way short of perfect with the implementation but at least the concept isn't too hard to grasp. For that matter you could say much the same for anything involving Pauline Hanson or Clive Palmer, at least it's possible to get your mind around where they stand.

But the Liberals? They're ???

Australia actually does need them to be a strong party. Regardless of which side you prefer the surest way to get weak government is to have no effective opposition.


----------



## Smurf1976 (24 August 2018)

An interesting "conspiracy theory" came up in conversation with a friend today.

Long story short - she's wondering if the Liberal party has made a firm decision to lose the next election and the rest is simply detail of the means of achieving it.

Rationale is that the housing bubble looks to have popped in Sydney and Melbourne at least, there's the banking royal commission, the drought, energy problems and this economic expansion has been going so long it would be a sheer miracle if there wasn't a recession during the next government's term. Put all that together and handing the whole lot to Labor (or anyone else) would be a logical decision if you're taking a long term view. Get re-elected in 2022 and spend the next decade reminding everyone of how the wheels fell off under Labor.

An interesting thought.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> An interesting "conspiracy theory" came up in conversation with a friend today.
> 
> Long story short - she's wondering if the Liberal party has made a firm decision to lose the next election and the rest is simply detail of the means of achieving it.
> 
> ...




They are all in it for the money and being in Opposition doesn't pay as well as being a Cabinet Minister.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> But the Liberals? They're ???




Privatisation of government services and deregulation of business so its easier for them to rip the public off.


----------



## sptrawler (24 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Why not ? If people voted in what they thought was a moderate Liberal government and then got a Right wing conservative one without them voting for it, then they've been duped.



And how many leaders have been flipped in the last 10 years?


----------



## sptrawler (24 August 2018)

Smurf1976 said:


> An interesting "conspiracy theory" came up in conversation with a friend today.
> 
> Long story short - she's wondering if the Liberal party has made a firm decision to lose the next election and the rest is simply detail of the means of achieving it.
> 
> ...



Well the wheels have been wobbling, since 2008, so sooner or later it has to come off altogether.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> And how many leaders have been flipped in the last 10 years?




The last Labor lot that tried that got voted out and Turnbull lost 14 seats.


----------



## sptrawler (24 August 2018)

Morrison should have been put in ,when Abbott was flipped, it was only Fairfax and Labor pleading for Malcolm, that got him in.


----------



## So_Cynical (24 August 2018)

Good luck Scomo you're going to need it, 50/50 you will be one of the shortest serving PM's ever, certainly the shortest in modern times.


----------



## moXJO (24 August 2018)

drsmith said:


> 54 to 44.
> 
> Julie Bishop survives as deputy leader with around 70-odd votes.



Funny that this thread opened with a spill and ended with one.


----------



## sptrawler (24 August 2018)

So_Cynical said:


> Good luck Scomo you're going to need it, 50/50 you will be one of the shortest serving PM's ever, certainly the shortest in modern times.



That's pretty good odds cynic, they were gone two days ago, I think they were 46/54


----------



## drsmith (25 August 2018)

moXJO said:


> Funny that this thread opened with a spill and ended with one.



The final act may be Tony Abbot's gay sister running for Wentworth as a Lib.


----------



## Tisme (26 August 2018)




----------



## moXJO (26 August 2018)

drsmith said:


> The final act may be Tony Abbot's gay sister running for Wentworth as a Lib.



Abbott really hated Malcolm


----------



## Logique (26 August 2018)

There are of course two convenient explanations for everything:
1. Climate change
2. Tony Abbott - the most powerful backbencher in history







> 22 August 2018
> http://joannenova.com.au/
> *Turnbull’s “pet fetish” – thinks people will sing hallalujah to climate change*. He’s ruined. (Blame Abbott) ...Abbott is an incredibly powerful man. From the backbench he’s creating disunity, stopping legislation, ruining careers, and bringing down Prime Ministers, all just for the fun of it.
> 
> ...


----------



## PZ99 (26 August 2018)

Abbott changed his climate but he didn't change his oil


----------



## Knobby22 (26 August 2018)

Abbott is a fool and a hypocrite.
He stopped the lower price power for revenge.
He increased the immigration rate by 30% and now says it should be lowered.
As Prime Minister he was hopeless. As a Liberal member he is a wrecker supported by News Corp which gave him some power.
He will be and is hated by most who habe to deal with him. History will not be forgiving.


----------



## Junior (27 August 2018)

Nice rant from young Turnbull Junior.

https://www.theage.com.au/environme...ll-blasts-climate-stance-20180827-p50018.html


----------



## sptrawler (27 August 2018)

Junior said:


> Nice rant from young Turnbull Junior.
> 
> https://www.theage.com.au/environme...ll-blasts-climate-stance-20180827-p50018.html




Yes and still no answer, for the shortfall in generation. 
Jeez it would be wonderful if someone put up a viable answer, rather than just rehashing the same question and somehow claiming ownership of the moral stand.


----------



## Tisme (27 August 2018)




----------



## sptrawler (27 August 2018)

Yes and also did to Abbott, what was done to him.
Yet if you read the papers you would think, Mal had been assassinated, Fairfax just about have it as a day of mourning. lol
Sounds like they lost their "bunny" to me.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Yes and also did to Abbott, what was done to him.
> Yet if you read the papers you would think, Mal had been assassinated, Fairfax just about have it as a day of mourning. lol
> Sounds like they lost their "bunny" to me.




You are aware that Alan Jones and Ray Hadley, two of the most vituperous Dutton supporters, work for Fairfax ?


----------



## sptrawler (27 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> You are aware that Alan Jones and Ray Hadley, two of the most vituperous Dutton supporters, work for Fairfax ?



No I wasn't aware, but then again, I've never heard them.
I'm just going on what I read on the SMH and the Age.


----------



## sptrawler (27 August 2018)

So Malcolm is going to force a by election, by not staying until Christmas.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-27/malcolm-turnbull-to-resign-from-parliament/10170614


----------



## TLS (27 August 2018)

I think my primary concern over all of this during the last ten years is our loss of democracy. What is the point of voting anymore .... I used to get that you voted for a party, not the leader but this has become ridiculous.

Ie. I had/have had an opinion of Judd vs Gillard, Abbot vs Turnball, Bishop, Scomo and would/would not have voted for each of them depending on who stood for the leadership at the time of an election. Still pissed at the loss of Bishop more than anything else out of all of this...

To me there is one thing that should instantly be put in place (legislation). Scomo come on down ....

A publicly elected PM should not be able to be ousted by internal party room machinations. The public voted them in and votes them out - simple equation in my mind.

- You want to change leaders. Fine by me but take it to an election.
- PM wants to make a radical decision like send troops to war etc without bi-partisan support. Fine by me but take it to an election.


----------



## sptrawler (27 August 2018)

TLS said:


> I think my primary concern over all of this during the last ten years is our loss of democracy. What is the point of voting anymore .... I used to get that you voted for a party, not the leader but this has become ridiculous.
> 
> Ie. I had/have had an opinion of Judd vs Gillard, Abbot vs Turnball, Bishop, Scomo and would/would not have voted for each of them depending on who stood for the leadership at the time of an election. Still pissed at the loss of Bishop more than anything else out of all of this...
> 
> ...



I absolutely agree with you.
Turnbull should have waited until after the election, and maybe it will be a lesson.
I guess the big difference was, the media pushed for Turnbull to oust Abbott, the Party ousted Turnbull.
Now Turnbull has spat the dummy, and going to cause the wrecking ball effect, he so slammed Abbott for.
Politicians lack so much self appraisal, maybe that's why they are politicians.
As for Julie Bishop, I guess similar applies, she quit the job of foriegn affairs.
Now she is telling her replacement how to do it, maybe she should have just stayed in the job, no one was critising her.

https://thewest.com.au/politics/fed...op-urges-fight-for-mh17-justice-ng-b88941423z

Politics and ego's appear to go hand in hand, someone needs to tell them, they are there for us not for themselves. It is supposed to be a calling a dedication a desire, it is about doing your best for the Country.
Again, just my take on it.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 August 2018)

TLS said:


> A publicly elected PM should not be able to be ousted by internal party room machinations. The public voted them in and votes them out - simple equation in my mind.




Yep, I agree with that.

The Prime Minister sets the agenda and direction, decides priorities and who he will listen to is in effect the government and if the electorate decides to vote for what they see as a moderate government then they don't want a right wing upstart taking over (and vice versa) without their permission.

So really, how can you trust a party that is so divided by ideology that they can't guarantee who their leader will be in six months or a years time ?

The Libs are too much of a risk to vote for imo.


----------



## sptrawler (27 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Yep, I agree with that.
> 
> The Prime Minister sets the agenda and direction, decides priorities and who he will listen to is in effect the government and if the electorate decides to vote for what they see as a moderate government then they don't want a right wing upstart taking over (and vice versa) without their permission.
> 
> ...



Yes Rumpy, see you at the booth, how are the Labor how to vote pamphlets going? 
Julia, Kev and Bill would like to join you, but they are still receiving medical attention, to remove the knives they put in each others back's.


----------



## TLS (27 August 2018)

The Prime Minister sets the agenda and direction, decides priorities and who he will listen to is in effect the government and if the electorate decides to vote for what they see as a moderate government then they don't want a right wing upstart taking over (and vice versa) without their permission.

So really, how can you trust a party that is so divided by ideology that they can't guarantee who their leader will be in six months or a years time ?

The Libs are too much of a risk to vote for imo.[/QUOTE]

So which party has a stable leader at the moment (I'd say none) . It wasn't that long ago that your biased party leader was being challenged too...


----------



## SirRumpole (27 August 2018)

TLS said:


> So which party has a stable leader at the moment (I'd say none) . It wasn't that long ago that your biased party leader was being challenged too...




If you are talking about Bill Shorten (he's not my leader as I'm not a member of the Labor Party), that was about 5 years ago I think.

Biased ? Who the hell isn't in politics ?


----------



## SirRumpole (27 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Yes Rumpy, see you at the booth, how are the Labor how to vote pamphlets going?
> Julia, Kev and Bill would like to join you, but they are still receiving medical attention, to remove the knives they put in each others back's.




FFS they got voted out because of their disunity.

Same should happen to the Libs.


----------



## TLS (27 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> If you are talking about Bill Shorten (he's not my leader as I'm not a member of the Labor Party), that was about 5 years ago I think.
> 
> Biased ? Who the hell isn't in politics ?




Oh well , I thought he was .. end of topic for me now.


----------



## sptrawler (27 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Biased ? Who the hell isn't in politics ?




No one should be biased in politics, it isn't as though either side has a monopoly on intelligence and neither side has all the right answers.
The responsibility of the voter, is to choose which ideas and policies, will make a better Country.
Sometimes this may require a tightening of the belt, sometimes a loosening. 
One thing for sure, constantly pandering to people's wants, will result in disaster.
Because as can be seen by the charts of what people are spending money on, their wants far exceed their needs and always will.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Because as can be seen by the charts of what people are spending money on, their wants far exceed their needs and always will.




Who is pandering to the want of tobacco ?

Was plain packaging of cigarettes pandering to smokers ?


----------



## sptrawler (27 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> FFS they got voted out because of their disunity.
> 
> Same should happen to the Libs.




And probably will, doesn't mean it wasn't the right thing to do, Turnbull should have waited untill Abbott lost the election.
I and most of the right leaning memebers on here at the time, said it was a disaster.
Turnbull never has known what he stands for, just lovers driving the big chair. IMO
We all said, Morrison should have been put in, if Abbott was to be toppled.

Not saying Turnbull isn't a nice guy, but it isn't about being a nice guy, it is about getting the job done. Then being judged on what you stood for, Turnbull can't do that, Bill will struggle with the same problem.

I think Morrison is one who will make a commitment and stand by it, because I have the feeling he thinks it through, maybe he isn't into populist politics.
That would be novel, can't wait to see how the media handle another John Howard. Just my opinion.


----------



## sptrawler (27 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Who is pandering to the want of tobacco ?
> 
> Was plain packaging of cigarettes pandering to smokers ?




People can smoke if they want to, but taxpayers shouldn't be buying the cigarettes for them, then have to pay for their health problems as a result of their smoking.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> but taxpayers shouldn't be buying the cigarettes for them




Huh ?

Australia has one of the highest taxes on cigarettes in the world.


----------



## sptrawler (27 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Huh ?
> 
> Australia has one of the highest taxes on cigarettes in the world.



Obviously not high enough, I still see the obviously unemployed smoking, while sitting in the City mall.
Like I said, if someone who is working wants to spend their money on smokes fine, but I do mind when I pay taxes and see the unemployed smoking how the hell can they afford that?
I gave it up years ago, because I couldn't afford it and I was working.
Now you want me to forego my retirement, to provide them with smokes, FFS?


----------



## SirRumpole (28 August 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Now you want me to forego my retirement, to provide them with smokes, FFS?




They may be paying for your retirement with their cigarette taxes.


----------



## PZ99 (28 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> They may be paying for your retirement with their cigarette taxes.



That's exactly what they are doing.

[2014] Australian Liberal Democratic senator David Leyonhjelm has just delivered a speech which stands up for the one rights of one in five citizens who choose to smoke.

His speech titled, Thank you For Smoking, he praises nicotine [friends] for their $8 billion a year contribution to the economy and says he did the maths: Last year smokers cost the health care system $320 million and another $150 million in bushfire control 

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/...-staggering-generosity-to-the-economy-2014-10

Now even if those figures are exaggerated it's still very clear their revenue far outstrips their cost to the economy. Pretty sure the ALP want to increase tobacco tax by some 12% every year. It's worth noting - that $8b a year is even more revenue than the carbon tax was. Maybe we should change Shortens' moniker from Electricity bill to Puffing Billy.

Just for the record - I'm a non smoker for much the same reason as @sptrawler is. I can't justify paying all that tax for a puff


----------



## SirRumpole (28 August 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Just for the record - I'm a non smoker for much the same reason as @sptrawler is. I can't justify paying all that tax for a puff




Same here, I don't mind taxes on stupid.


----------



## Tisme (28 August 2018)

TLS said:


> I think my primary concern over all of this during the last ten years is our loss of democracy. What is the point of voting anymore .... I used to get that you voted for a party, not the leader but this has become ridiculous.
> 
> Ie. I had/have had an opinion of Judd vs Gillard, Abbot vs Turnball, Bishop, Scomo and would/would not have voted for each of them depending on who stood for the leadership at the time of an election. Still pissed at the loss of Bishop more than anything else out of all of this...
> 
> ...




Kevin Rudd went a fair way in making sure it is now difficult to replace their leader without rank and file support.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> Kevin Rudd went a fair way in making sure it is now difficult to replace their leader without rank and file support.




And if the Libs copied that they would look like a clone of the Labor Party.


----------



## Tisme (28 August 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> And if the Libs copied that they would look like a clone of the Labor Party.




They would need a rank and file first ... I'm not sure the LNP have any members these days.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 August 2018)

Tisme said:


> They would need a rank and file first ... I'm not sure the LNP have any members these days.




Not enough to fill the MCG that's for sure.


----------



## PZ99 (28 August 2018)

The only way to fix the LNP is to go into opposition and stay there until they reform their ideology. Either they're a Liberal Party or they're a Conservative party. They can't be both.
It's never been a harmonious broad church. The only reason it looked stable under Howard is because all his opponents were shown the same door that just slammed on Turnbull.

The biggest problem for the LNP is funding. There's no money there. We might remember Malcolm Turnbull donating $1.75m to the party during the 2016 election. No chance of that again - if anything he should demand a refund due to fees for no service. On the other hand the Cory Tory party has a truckload of cash and it seems blindingly obvious to me that's it's the only way the Con*sever*tives can campaign against a Labor party affluently funded by the unions.

We really should have a choice of Labor, Liberal Democrats or Conservatives. 3 clear choices.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 August 2018)

PZ99 said:


> The only way to fix the LNP is to go into opposition and stay there until they reform their ideology. Either they're a Liberal Party or they're a Conservative party. They can't be both.
> It's never been a harmonious broad church. The only reason it looked stable under Howard is because all his opponents were shown the same door that just slammed on Turnbull.
> 
> The biggest problem for the LNP is funding. There's no money there. We might remember Malcolm Turnbull donating $1.75m to the party during the 2016 election. No chance of that again - if anything he should demand a refund due to fees for no service. On the other hand the Cory Tory party has a truckload of cash and it seems blindingly obvious to me that's it's the only way the Con*sever*tives can campaign against a Labor party affluently funded by the unions.
> ...




Maybe they could take some notice of a former party great.

https://theconversation.com/malcolm...d-reading-for-the-morrison-government-102187?


----------



## PZ99 (28 August 2018)

LOL. Malcolm Fraser made the *Coal*tion very twitchy when he went Green and campaigned for Sarah Hanson-Young against an Abbott majority in the senate


----------



## Tisme (28 August 2018)

PZ99 said:


> the only way the Con*sever*tives can campaign against a Labor party affluently funded by the unions.
> 
> .




Of course the Libs hate unions because they can't, and never could, organise themselves into a cohesive solidarity, preferring to be peacocks rather than noisy minors.


----------



## PZ99 (28 August 2018)

I'll pay that one


----------



## wayneL (28 August 2018)

Conservatives might have been viable,  but I reckon the strong Christian component may be a deal-breaker for a lot of folk.


----------



## wayneL (28 August 2018)

Lib Dems are  viable but don't have any infrastructure as a party at this point


----------



## PZ99 (28 August 2018)

I've been watching the CISAus events for the past week or so with guests such as Howard, Costello, Hewson and their latest one has Tony Abbott on the state of Australia's political landscape for anyone who has a spare hour or so...

I like the bit where he said social security should be a trampoline rather than a hammock


----------



## PZ99 (25 September 2018)

*Smallest deficit in a decade: Treasurer*

The federal government's budget deficit for the 2017/18 financial year was $10.1 billion, much smaller than originally predicted.

The deficit was $10.1 billion in the year, or 0.6 per cent of gross domestic product, according to the final budget outcome released on Tuesday.

That's a $19.3 billion improvement on the deficit originally estimated for the period.

Stronger-than-expected economic growth and more Australians in work contributed to the impressive improvement, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg says.

The amount of money coming in was $13.4 billion higher than expected, while total spending was $6.9 billion less than forecast, with the Future Fund earnings up $1.1 billion in net terms.

"That's the result of a strong economy," Mr Frydenberg told reporters in Sydney in Tuesday.

"We are seeing more people in jobs than ever before, and that's more senior Australians, more women, more younger people.

"We are seeing across the economy good growth, and in 17/18 that's been reflected in these better numbers."

Real economic growth in 2017/18 was 2.9 per cent, slightly stronger than the forecast growth of about 2.75 forecast.

Mr Frydenberg said the results meant the government is on track with its plan to bring the budget back to balance in 2019/20.

https://www.news.com.au/national/br...b/news-story/fa5f3424753a5db130929f45be9ab55c

To compare the Turnbull era against the Abbott era is to compare growth against austerity.

Growth wins every time, and these numbers support it


----------



## SirRumpole (25 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Growth wins every time, and these numbers support it




Looks like we never needed corporate tax cuts after all ? 

Amazing how a government with stuff all enacted economic policy can achieve good results. It makes one wonder whether it was actually due to them or other factors.

And if it can be sustained.


----------



## Tisme (25 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Looks like we never needed corporate tax cuts after all ?
> 
> Amazing how a government with stuff all enacted economic policy can achieve good results. It makes one wonder whether it was actually due to them or other factors.
> 
> And if it can be sustained.




Wayne Swan?


----------



## SirRumpole (25 September 2018)

Tisme said:


> Wayne Swan?




What about Swanny ?


----------



## Tisme (25 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> What about Swanny ?




Other factor?


----------



## SirRumpole (25 September 2018)

Tisme said:


> Other factor?




Well yes, there was a thing called the GFC which was handled by a stimulus package at the time, but the current government has no economic policy excerpt for corporate tax cuts which never got through so how can we say that the supposedly good economic figures are the result of government policy ?


----------



## PZ99 (25 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Well yes, there was a thing called the GFC which was handled by a stimulus package at the time, but the current government has no economic policy excerpt for corporate tax cuts which never got through so how can we say that the supposedly good economic figures are the result of government policy ?



Easy. The punters around the water cooler learned very quickly that once Abbott was gone so too was the desire to disembowel their wallets with a serrated bread knife and so they started spending their money again. You can achieve good economic results from doing nothing for as long as you don't bite the hand that feeds you. It's a perfect argument for smaller Govt and less interference which is what the Coalition was supposed to be about.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Easy. The punters around the water cooler learned very quickly that once Abbott was gone so too was the desire to disembowel their wallets with a serrated bread knife and so they started spending their money again. You can achieve good economic results from doing nothing for as long as you don't bite the hand that feeds you. It's a perfect argument for smaller Govt and less interference which is what the Coalition was supposed to be about.




Wasn't Abbott supposed to be for smaller government ? Sack public servants, shove the health care burden back to the consumers, remove subsidies to the car industry etc ? 

If you move to the Left, that means more government doesn't it ?


----------



## sptrawler (25 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Well yes, there was a thing called the GFC which was handled by a stimulus package at the time,




It is when you say things like that, where our relationship, falls apart again. 

That stimulus package was the biggest waste of money in Australian fiscal history, China was ramping up buying our resources from 2006-2013, but I guess if you keep saying something over and over some will believe it.
Swan was a goose.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> It is when you say things like that, where our relationship, falls apart again.
> 
> That stimulus package was the biggest waste of money in Australian fiscal history, China was ramping up buying our resources from 2006-2013, but I guess if you keep saying something over and over some will believe it.
> Swan was a goose.




I think you are wrong there. 

As has been said, the economy is about confidence. If nothing was done the foreign contagion would have spread to local consumers and they would have stopped spending, resulting in job losses, increasing deficit anyway, and a downward spiral. As least the deficit here stopped that, and we achieved an AAA credit rating in the midst of all that gloom.


----------



## PZ99 (25 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Wasn't Abbott supposed to be for smaller government ? Sack public servants, shove the health care burden back to the consumers, remove subsidies to the car industry etc ?
> 
> If you move to the Left, that means more government doesn't it ?



Yes it does but that isn't what transpired. Abbott destroyed confidence and disrupted the economy with his centre-right slash and burn agenda and I reckon if he had stayed as PM for much longer we would've copped a self induced recession. He knows that, that's why he went aye-over-tee and back flipped on virtually everything. Turnbull, as you quite rightly pointed out, did very little and IMO it was a clear case of not fixing something that wasn't broken. Australia is a smart enough country where people just want to get on with their lives, go to work, pay their taxes, buy their goods and services and veg out on farcebook and the like...

Give us infrastructure, health care, education and security and we'll do the rest.
What we don't need is the Govt to either hold our hand or to spank it.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 September 2018)

PZ99 said:


> Give us infrastructure, health care, education and security and we'll do the rest.
> What we don't need is the Govt to either hold our hand or to spank it.




Fair comment, except that a lot of people these days seem to think we would get all those things under Labor more than the Coalition.


----------



## Junior (26 September 2018)

The current Government hasn't been able to make any substantial changes or implement any significant policies.  This has created some certainty and therefore confidence in the economy....no change is good for business!

Also.....rampant population growth.  More taxpayers = more tax revenue.


----------



## PZ99 (2 October 2018)

_"Take me to your leader.."_ 

https://www.news.com.au/finance/wor...o/news-story/0c1bc9c16d5b67c19c9c51751cbd327e


----------



## sptrawler (2 October 2018)

Yes, even Keating has waded into the fracas, saying you would need a microscope to find what Turnbull stood for, jeez all the LNP voters said that before he was put in. lol
It was only Labor and Fairfax, calling for him to replace Abbott, now it is shock horror what a FW. lol

https://www.theage.com.au/politics/...savages-malcolm-turnbull-20181002-p507dz.html

What I can't understand is why it is such a big issue now? I guess with 24/7 media, everyone and his dog, has to have a spot.


----------



## SirRumpole (3 October 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Yes, even Keating has waded into the fracas, saying you would need a microscope to find what Turnbull stood for, jeez all the LNP voters said that before he was put in. lol
> It was only Labor and Fairfax, calling for him to replace Abbott, now it is shock horror what a FW. lol
> 
> https://www.theage.com.au/politics/...savages-malcolm-turnbull-20181002-p507dz.html
> ...




At least Turnbull appeared to bring a sense of rational, evidence based policy into government, the rest were just going on their blind ideology which happened to be flawed, but they couldn't see that.

Ideology is like religion (sorry Smurf), once you have it, no amount of evidence will allow you to change it.


----------



## PZ99 (3 October 2018)

More to the point the Turnbull Govt was in a winning position. The Abbott Govt polling was worse than the Govt even today. I can't believe people ever thought Abbott could've won the 2016 election - they were headed for a massive wipe out leading to at least two terms in opposition.

_Oooh look... money_


----------



## IFocus (3 October 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Yes, even Keating has waded into the fracas, saying you would need a microscope to find what Turnbull stood for, jeez all the LNP voters said that before he was put in. lol
> It was only Labor and Fairfax, calling for him to replace Abbott, now it is shock horror what a FW. lol
> 
> https://www.theage.com.au/politics/...savages-malcolm-turnbull-20181002-p507dz.html
> ...




God I miss Keating his turn of phase is just poetry 

"But absence of belief and vacillation in the big job carries risk and with it, attendant danger, leaving the field open to subterranean malcontents and their sympathisers."


----------



## sptrawler (3 October 2018)

PZ99 said:


> More to the point the Turnbull Govt was in a winning position. The Abbott Govt polling was worse than the Govt even today. I can't believe people ever thought Abbott could've won the 2016 election - they were headed for a massive wipe out leading to at least two terms in opposition.
> 
> _Oooh look... money_



I don't think two terms in opposition would have hurt, the two terms they have done have been a complete waste of time, with the Senate issue.


----------



## PZ99 (3 October 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I don't think two terms in opposition would have hurt, the two terms they have done have been a complete waste of time, with the Senate issue.




Bill Shorten likes this..


----------



## sptrawler (4 October 2018)

I actually will vote for Shorten, I really think Australia is off the rails, everyone is grabbing what they can.
The self centered attitude of Australia ATM, is appalling, a real collapse and recession will be a reality check everyone needs. IMO


----------



## sptrawler (4 October 2018)

sptrawler said:


> I actually will vote for Shorten, I really think Australia is off the rails, everyone is grabbing what they can.
> The self centered attitude of Australia ATM, is appalling, a real collapse and recession will be a reality check everyone needs. IMO



Don't get too excited Rumpy, not many will come out better off, than they went in.


----------



## PZ99 (5 October 2018)

A collapse, a recession and the name *Short*en all do have a certain parallelism


----------



## sptrawler (5 October 2018)

Sometimes a reset is required, everything in life overshoots, due to enthusiasm. 
The over indulgence of the rich and greedy, eventually causes a natural retraction, which will happen.
Then those less fortunate, climb onto the ladder of success, and so the circle begins again.
Those half way up the ladder, get to meet those climbing, as they slide down.


----------



## Tisme (5 October 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Sometimes a reset is required, everything in life overshoots, due to enthusiasm.
> The over indulgence of the rich and greedy, eventually causes a natural retraction, which will happen.
> Then those less fortunate, climb onto the ladder of success, and so the circle begins again.
> Those half way up the ladder, get to meet those climbing, as they slide down.




USA is proof in motion of change is good. The place is booming, much to the dismay of rectitudinous "we woz robbed" Democrats who foretold debilitating chaos and loss of empire if Trump was elected.

For a "liberal" party the govt seems pretty focused on taking away our civil liberties, the latest being giving our phone passwords  when demanded by men in uniform.


----------



## sptrawler (11 November 2018)

I guess all the media reports on Malcolm's family funding anti LNP candidates, explains why Malcolm had to go and as for going quietly he hasn't done that.
I personally don't think he will be remembered fondly. LOL
I think he resonated well with the "me" generation, and that is IMO, becoming more obvious as the days pass.
He was turfed out, the first time, nothing changed, somewhat like Kev. 

Just my opinion, but Australia hasn't achieved much, since 2007, the biggest mining boom in history.
Who would have guessed?


----------



## Humid (12 November 2018)

Geez looking at pic of Mals young bloke....looks like he would be lucky to pull the skin off a rice pudding.
Never done a physical day’s work in his life I reckon he would struggle to pump his own petrol.
Can someone link a pic I’m too tired....


----------



## sptrawler (14 November 2018)

I think Paul Murray sums up Turnbull's sacking nicely, hopefully he moves on and enjoys his retirement.

https://thewest.com.au/opinion/paul-murray/malcolm-turnbulls-demise-is-no-mystery-ng-b881020127z


----------



## sptrawler (20 November 2018)

Obviously the Turnbull's have found some allies, which wouldn't be hard, just sad people all round. IMO

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...ony-abbott-from-his-seat-20181120-p50h77.html
I personally think, Abbott has faced more personal attacks than anyone in politics and before anyone goes on about he deserves it. That is just the point.


----------

