This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Australian Federal Election - 2019

Jump to new

ALP seem to have abandoned any prospect of addressing bracket creep for anyone above lower/middle income levels, are re-introducing Budget Repair Levy, abolishing neg gearing and refundable franking credits. They are proposing to introduce a minimum tax rate of 30% for distributions from Family Trusts. These measures will impact small businesses and retirees, not just high-income earners.

The issue I have is that anyone who earns a decent income or runs a business, or funds their own retirement, are being demonised by Shorten (despite the fact that Bill himself, is very much a member of the "top end of town"), and made to feel like they aren't contributing enough to society. The people being demonised already pay the vast majority of tax, and provide the vast majority of jobs in this country. As I've previously stated, I think the impact on unemployment could be significant, and the projections of how much revenue will be raised from these measures is vastly overstated.

In terms of paying down Government debt, I'll believe it when I see it.
 
Its only 2 days in .... and I am so so so so zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Apparently if you mention someone is Swedish ... your anti swedetic.

I vote all politicians are fitted with the following Hand organ ... might make their speeches even amusing

It even translates TRUMP SPEECH ...

 
Here is the exchange on superannuation Bill Shorten had today:

Journalist: Can you rule out no new or increased taxes on superannuation?

BS: We have no plans to increase taxes on superannuation.

J: That’s different from ruling it out though.

BS: We have no plans to introduce any new taxes on superannuation.

J: So will you rule it out?

BS: Sure.

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

I'm calling BS on that

Their official policy is (or was and therefore will be) to tax contributions and earnings.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04...s-for-high-income-wealthy-australians/6410800
 
I preferred Abbot story ...

He reported said he is ready to stand in as Prime Minister ... in the SMH and a few other outlets reported the same.

 
Junior said:
the projections of how much revenue will be raised from these measures is vastly overstated.
Click to expand...
The one certainty is that any change which uses static accounting in forecasting the results is certain to not produce the expected outcome.

Always amazes me how often politicians of all colours, and rather a few business leaders, make this basic mistake.

Change one input = other things change too.
 
"Tonight they deleted their entire superannuation policy. What is Labor trying to hide?"

They must have read this thread
 
Environment now no. 1 issue.
Surprised. If Turnbull had of been allowed to proceed with the energy policy I am sure it wouldn't be so prominent.
 
rederob said:
You might be, but your grounds for interest would be based on what, exactly?
Perhaps you could inform yourself better about polling.
Click to expand...

There would be a slant to a particular group mindset. Namely abc flogs.
There is no way environment would be number one in the broader community. Cost of living would be the major concern.
 
rederob said:
You might be, but your grounds for interest would be based on what, exactly?
Perhaps you could inform yourself better about polling.
Click to expand...
Yes self selected from the universe of ABC readers, mostly. I would be interested in the political leanings of such.

Perhaps better information on such matters may be illuminating.

For instance (admitedly from a very small sample), none of my colleagues and friends rely on Aunty as a reliable news source, ergo unlikely to find that survey to participate in. Indeed, I only found the link via the discussion here.

I think there could be a bias in the sample, happy to be proven wrong with robust data.
 
Climate / environment will always rate better when it's hot. It wasn't hot last time

Last time I posted a vote compass poll on here it was during the SSM debate. They sampled 600,000 people and sampled each electorate under the same prerequisites as this poll.

End result turned out to be very similar which means if the participants were biased - so too was the whole country.

Can't see this being much different. I know plenty of Liberal / Conservative / Right that frequent the ABC - there wouldn't be complaints of bias if they didn't
 
wayneL said:
I think there could be a bias in the sample, happy to be proven wrong with robust data.
Click to expand...
Sampling and self selection are different.
The data to date is around 100 times the order of a typical poll and over 30 times larger than the biggest polls in Australia.
As PZ99 noted above, the last compass self selection poll was of a massive scale, and delivered outcomes consistent with the ballot.
So the issue you cannot resolve is what constitutes "robust data," and without offering any evidence you have an idea of bias.
 
I posit you cannot resolve what is robust data or bias either. Hence my use of language.

I will concede the point regarding recent temperatures in Oz, which indroduces (possibly) another bias.
 
I also posit that you are biased about bias
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...