The Albanese government

[sptrawler]

I'm no lover of the past or present pollies all dead do-dos I reckon. Professional bum polishers looking after this 3 year stint and the hip pocket nerve.

Agree 100%, I just thought Albo was a bit cleverer than most, he may prove those who underestimated him correct.
I certainly hope not, but I'm not as sure as I was.
I wonder what the odds are on Dutton ATM, It might be a great speculative punt.
I got Bill's, shoot himself in the foot moment correct, when he announced the franking credits changes, this isn't as obvious an issue yet but IMO it has the ability to become that moment.

 

[farmerge]

Well best of luck with that, as I said I think even back then the general belief was that the WMD was suss, so I hope he lands it well.
It is going to be as uncomfortable for him, as it is going to be for the U.S, the U.K and most people involved.

As Sir Humphrey Appleby would say, "That's a very courageous decision Prime Minister".

Ah Sir Humphrey the ultimate Public Servant answerable to knowone.

 

[wayneL]

Agree 100%, I just thought Albo was a bit cleverer than most, he may prove those who underestimated him correct

You all know that I am no lover of the latest iteration at the coalition, so this is in no way some sort of LNP versus Labor rant.

I think, considering the gravity of the current economic and geo-political situation, that this government is the worst of all things, perhaps the worst government in the history of our nation.

I believe there are some truly serious politicians in the labor party but the main names cannot be considered serious politicians in any sense of the word.

Albo, Bowen, Wong, Plibfddffffdsadhufhek, et al., all ******* clowns in a clown show, especially Albo and Bowen.

A second term would be an absolute disaster for this country. Equally depressing is that if the Australian people had the foresight to vote these imbeciles out on their ass, as they should, we would simply end up with the other mob of fools who seemed to be intent on being a carbon copy, despite all the BS rhetoric.

I pray that one day at the Australian electric will grow up and realize that there are other alternatives to this pantomime which is destroying our country.

Is a caveat, it is actually our fault. Play the ends have to stop being beguiled by pork barreling, electoral bribery, manufactured persona and carefully curated charisma, and pathetic virtue signaling nonsense.

Unless we wake up we are sleepwalking into a dystopia.

 

[SirRumpole]

I think, considering the gravity of the current economic and geo-political situation, that this government is the worst of all things, perhaps the worst government in the history of our nation.

I don't think so.

They need at least 2 terms to fix up the negligence of the Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison governments.

I will be judging them further down the track. So far the only major stuff-up has been The Voice which is not particularly important to 97% of the population.

They need to get moving on infrastructure, particularly energy and housing.

Cost of living is hurting, but it's not something governments can do much about, unless they want to cut the GST, and watch the States scream if they try that.

 

[sptrawler]

I don't think so.

They need at least 2 terms to fix up the negligence of the Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison governments.

I will be judging them further down the track. So far the only major stuff-up has been The Voice which is not particularly important to 97% of the population.

They need to get moving on infrastructure, particularly energy and housing.

Cost of living is hurting, but it's not something governments can do much about, unless they want to cut the GST, and watch the States scream if they try that.

Agree 100%, NDIS getting sorted, In the education sector teacher standards getting sorted, is a great start.
There are a lot of issues that only labor can sort and they aren't shirking it, as long as they don't get too sidetracked.

Next aged care, there is no reason someone who has a house worth $200k should have to be hit the same as someone with a house worth $3m.

Wealthy Boomers to be asked to pay more for aged care

A federal government taskforce has advised Aged Care Minister Anika Wells to reform the way aged care services are means-tested to improve equity and inject new funds into the system.

www.theage.com.au

From the article:
Baby Boomers who can afford to pay would be asked to contribute more to their aged care costs under an anticipated shake-up of how both residential and home care are funded for older Australians.

A federal government taskforce has advised Aged Care Minister Anika Wells to reform the way aged care services are means-tested to improve equity and inject new funds into a system already costing taxpayers more than $30 billion a year.
Its report will be published later this month and leans more towards raising consumer co-contributions, rather than options such as a taxpayer levy, in its blueprint for making the sector sustainable as Australia’s ageing population seeks out services with higher expectations of quality.
Over the next decade alone, the independent Parliamentary Budget Office estimates the cost of aged care will climb by more than 82 per cent – or almost $29 billion – to $63.6 billion in 2033-34. The government’s response to the taskforce recommendations is expected around the time of the May budget.

At present, 96 per cent of care costs in residential aged care are paid by taxpayers and just 4 per cent comes from user contributions because an individual’s means-tested payments are capped around $33,000 a year, or $78,500 over a lifetime.

Loading
Those thresholds, as well as how the family home is counted in means tests, would be reconsidered under the taskforce advice. The system currently counts the family home only to a maximum value of $198,000, meaning someone with a property worth $300,000 is assessed the same as another with a home worth $3 million.
The daily living fee that people in residential aged care pay for services such as meals, laundry and cleaning – which is set at $61 a day, or 85 per cent of the age pension – could be re-evaluated and lifted for those who have greater means.

People who can afford it and receive home care packages would also pay more; their current means-tested care fees are capped at $13,000 a year, or $78,500 over a lifetime, leaving the government to cover about 95 per cent of costs.

In addition, the taskforce has looked at whether superannuation should play a role in aged care.

 

[IFocus]

They need at least 2 terms to fix up the negligence of the Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison governments.

This is the thing just letting the Chinese into the Pacific never mind the bad mouthing BS that killed billions in exports, addressing slave labour conditions and wages, having a real go at the Murray / Darling instead of giving away water to Beetroot's mates etc.

 

[wayneL]

Agree 100%, NDIS getting sorted, In the education sector teacher standards getting sorted, is a great start.
There are a lot of issues that only labor can sort and they aren't shirking it, as long as they don't get too sidetracked.

Next aged care, there is no reason someone who has a house worth $200k should have to be hit the same as someone with a house worth $3m.

Wealthy Boomers to be asked to pay more for aged care

A federal government taskforce has advised Aged Care Minister Anika Wells to reform the way aged care services are means-tested to improve equity and inject new funds into the system.

www.theage.com.au

From the article:
Baby Boomers who can afford to pay would be asked to contribute more to their aged care costs under an anticipated shake-up of how both residential and home care are funded for older Australians.

A federal government taskforce has advised Aged Care Minister Anika Wells to reform the way aged care services are means-tested to improve equity and inject new funds into a system already costing taxpayers more than $30 billion a year.
Its report will be published later this month and leans more towards raising consumer co-contributions, rather than options such as a taxpayer levy, in its blueprint for making the sector sustainable as Australia’s ageing population seeks out services with higher expectations of quality.
Over the next decade alone, the independent Parliamentary Budget Office estimates the cost of aged care will climb by more than 82 per cent – or almost $29 billion – to $63.6 billion in 2033-34. The government’s response to the taskforce recommendations is expected around the time of the May budget.

At present, 96 per cent of care costs in residential aged care are paid by taxpayers and just 4 per cent comes from user contributions because an individual’s means-tested payments are capped around $33,000 a year, or $78,500 over a lifetime.

Loading
Those thresholds, as well as how the family home is counted in means tests, would be reconsidered under the taskforce advice. The system currently counts the family home only to a maximum value of $198,000, meaning someone with a property worth $300,000 is assessed the same as another with a home worth $3 million.
The daily living fee that people in residential aged care pay for services such as meals, laundry and cleaning – which is set at $61 a day, or 85 per cent of the age pension – could be re-evaluated and lifted for those who have greater means.

People who can afford it and receive home care packages would also pay more; their current means-tested care fees are capped at $13,000 a year, or $78,500 over a lifetime, leaving the government to cover about 95 per cent of costs.

In addition, the taskforce has looked at whether superannuation should play a role in aged care.

Like I said there are some serious politicians in the party and Godspeed to them.

But in the greater context these are minor things.

The combined vector of immigration and housing is an absolute clown show of epic proportions. Energy policy is even worse, especially with regards to the transport fleet.

Just these two factors alone have the potential to absolutely cripple this nation in the next 10 years.

And also the indigenous affairs genie has not been fully let out of the bottle as yet. Likewise on the social policy front there is no deceleration of the lunacy of gender ideology or the imposition of our own version of critical race theory.

This will continue to divide the population in such a way that we will never be able to unite on any issue whatsoever.

Divide and rule.

That said a seriously doubt the coalitions to substantively address any of these issues, so we either have to tolerate sourpuss Albo, or Mr potato head.

Until Australians grow up and vote for parties with proper ideology, we're basically farked. Those of us with property with the deeds in the safe, or close to it, will probably be fine. The rest are going to be for a discontented and that will prove to be a very bad thing.

 

[sptrawler]

Like I said there are some serious politicians in the party and Godspeed to them.

But in the greater context these are minor things.

The combined vector of immigration and housing is an absolute clown show of epic proportions. Energy policy is even worse, especially with regards to the transport fleet.

Just these two factors alone have the potential to absolutely cripple this nation in the next 10 years.

And also the indigenous affairs genie has not been fully let out of the bottle as yet. Likewise on the social policy front there is no deceleration of the lunacy of gender ideology or the imposition of our own version of critical race theory.

This will continue to divide the population in such a way that we will never be able to unite on any issue whatsoever.

Divide and rule.

That said a seriously doubt the coalitions to substantively address any of these issues, so we either have to tolerate sourpuss Albo, or Mr potato head.

Until Australians grow up and vote for parties with proper ideology, we're basically farked. Those of us with property with the deeds in the safe, or close to it, will probably be fine. The rest are going to be for a discontented and that will prove to be a very bad thing.

Agree with what you say, but until a viable alternative party can engage with the masses, the majority will either vote the Coalition or Labor, as they are the only two that present a cohesive believable platform.
It is just the way it is, the same with anything, no one would buy Jap crap until it had developed a reliable record.
If a new party wants to have credibility, it has to present credible evidence that they have the depth of candidate to carry out the job. In reality a lot of the long term independent or minor party candidates are their own worst enemies, by not forming larger and therefore stronger independent blocks.
The fact they don't, shows a degree of inflexibility in their beliefs and ideology, which in itself isnt a good trait for Governing.
Just my opinion.

 

[wayneL]

Agree with what you say, but until a viable alternative party can engage with the masses, the majority will either vote the Coalition or Labor, as they are the only two that present a cohesive believable platform.
It is just the way it is, the same with anything, no one would buy Jap crap until it had developed a reliable record.
If a new party wants to have credibility, it has to present credible evidence that they have the depth of candidate to carry out the job. In reality a lot of the long term independent or minor party candidates are their own worst enemies, by not forming larger and therefore stronger independent blocks.
The fact they don't, shows a degree of inflexibility in their beliefs and ideology, which in itself isnt a good trait for Governing.
Just my opinion.

I do have to agree with this. Each of the minor parties for which I hold a candle to, all have one "deal breaker" or another.

But..... So do the major parties for most people. The thing is that because of tribalism, people have learnt to accept these deal breakers.

Therefore, If people truly were examining the platforms of the various parties, they might find one outside of those major parties which more accurately reflect their beliefs.

Problem: I would say 90% of people do not actually examine the platforms of any of the parties, much less the ones they believe they should support.

 

[wayneL]

I do have to agree with this. Each of the minor parties for which I hold a candle to, all have one "deal breaker" or another.

But..... So do the major parties for most people. The thing is that because of tribalism, people have learnt to accept these deal breakers.

Therefore, If people truly were examining the platforms of the various parties, they might find one outside of those major parties which more accurately reflect their beliefs.

Problem: I would say 90% of people do not actually examine the platforms of any of the parties, much less the ones they believe they should support.

I will give you an example: I talk to people asking them if they understand the basic platform of a Labor Party, being socialism/social democracy/democratic socialism... Depending on the ruling faction.

I also asked them what they understanding of classical liberalism is, any idea whatsoever.

Indeed, those expousing actual marxism have very little idea what that actually means in practical terms.

IOW, the vast majority of people have NFI have what they are actually voting for. I think there is actually plenty of evidence of this on this very forum (with a few bewildering exceptions).

 

[sptrawler]

I will give you an example: I talk to people asking them if they understand the basic platform of a Labor Party, being socialism/social democracy/democratic socialism... Depending on the ruling faction.

I also asked them what they understanding of classical liberalism is, any idea whatsoever.

Indeed, those expousing actual marxism have very little idea what that actually means in practical terms.

IOW, the vast majority of people have NFI have what they are actually voting for. I think there is actually plenty of evidence of this on this very forum (with a few bewildering exceptions).

I doubt most of the members of both parties actually know the party fundamental ideology and most of the general public don't give a ratz arze anyway all they are interested in is what affects them and they vote accordingly.

That's why they get flipped so often and why there is very little difference between the major parties, both have their rusted on true believers and the swinging voters decide who they think are offering the best option and they get voted in.
The media has the most say on who gets voted in, as they are the ones who present the narrative, at the moment channel 9 has a strong influence through tv and printed media, but social media is eroding both platforms IMO.
Social media is allowing people to debate issues which is really throwing a spanner in the establishments methodology.

 

[wayneL]

I doubt most of the members of both parties actually know the party fundamental ideology and most of the general public don't give a ratz arze anyway all they are interested in is what affects them and they vote accordingly.

That's why they get flipped so often and why there is very little difference between the major parties, both have their rusted on true believers and the swinging voters decide who they think are offering the best option and they get voted in.
The media has the most say on who gets voted in, as they are the ones who present the narrative, at the moment channel 9 has a strong influence through tv and printed media, but social media is eroding both platforms IMO.

Best option?

Pardon my cynicism but I would more likely say, the most (scarcely) believable bu11shit.

 

[sptrawler]

Best option?

Pardon my cynicism but I would more likely say, the most (scarcely) believable bu11shit.

Whichever one is offering the best deal for the working middle class, that should be what the average aspirational person should strive to be, if they achieve better good on them, if they have strived and achieved medriocrity they still will have contributed and made Australia a better place and hopefully a secure life for themselves.
Those are the engine room of Australia and unfortunately, those are the ones who are being taken the pizz out of ATM.

 

[wayneL]

Whichever one is offering the best deal for the working middle class, that should be what the average aspirational person should strive to be, if they achieve better good on them, if they have strived and achieved medriocrity they still will have contributed and made Australia a better place and hopefully a secure life for themselves.
Those are the engine room of Australia and unfortunately, those are the ones who are being taken the pizz out of ATM.

Yep. But as I have alluded to the average voter has a very short term view of what the government might do for them.

IOW, what is the best political bribery for me in the next three years?

Sure that represents the best interests in that term, but I would posit that is the opposite of the interests of said voter in the long term...

... Particularly their children and grandchildren.

We are starting to see that.

 

[sptrawler]

Yep. But as I have alluded to the average voter has a very short term view of what the government might do for them.

IOW, what is the best political bribery for me in the next three years?

Sure that represents the best interests in that term, but I would posit that is the opposite of the interests of said voter in the long term...

... Particularly their children and grandchildren.

We are starting to see that.

But in reality that is the only option the middle class has, neither side of politics wants to address the underlying issue of a not fit for purpose taxation system, so the only option the middle class has to secure their childrens future is by securing their own. Simple really.

The real issue is the Govt is wedged by the tax system, the social obligation grows to what the tax system can bear, therefore nothing can be changed without the equilibrium being lost.

As soon as Australia looks like finding a surplus, the money isn't directed to building more productive infrastructure or helping build businesses, another social agenda is started up to use the increased funds.

It's very noble but as the NDIS shows it absorbs a lot of funds, that limit Australia's future growth and as is happening now it is unaffordable a bit like families that spend more than they earn and wonder why they have nothing.
To get giga factories built here, to use our own resources would take a lot of work by the Govt and a lot of creativity, those aren't strong suits of Australian Governments.
Before the last election, the W.A Govt and the Federal Govt were espousing the benefits, yet we have heard nothing since, just social issues, handouts, tax cuts, submarines and more social expenditure on renewables, yet the only mention now of batteries is buying them, not making them.

The examples go on and on, so of course the middle class is going to vote for those who they feel will make going to work worth it, what other option do they have? Our tax system is that anal, we would rather a company processed offshore, than give them a tax break to build here IMO. Lol

 

[Smurf1976]

Whichever one is offering the best deal for the working middle class,

Agreed subject to that being in a long term context not a short term one.

Many of the problems of today I can recall very well being discussed in the 1990's that the seeds were being sown back then with decisions made at the time. 30 years later and here we are.

 

[Smurf1976]

I will give you an example: I talk to people asking them if they understand the basic platform of a Labor Party, being socialism/social democracy/democratic socialism... Depending on the ruling faction.

A problem here is it's one thing to have a basic ideology but it's somewhat irrelevant if the party doesn't follow it.

Compare Labor and Liberal in their pre-1980 form versus today and they're barely recognisable.

Given their underlying ideology hasn't officially changed, either they weren't following it previously or they're not following it now.

 

[SirRumpole]

I also asked them what they understanding of classical liberalism is, any idea whatsoever.

"Classical liberalism is a political tradition and a branch of liberalism which advocates free market and laissez-faire economics; and civil liberties under the rule of law, with special emphasis on individual autonomy, limited government, economic freedom, political freedom and freedom of speech.[1] Classical liberalism, contrary to liberal branches like social liberalism, looks more negatively on social policies, taxation and the state involvement in the lives of individuals, and it advocates deregulation.[2]"

Classical liberalism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I would argue that although some of these principles are fine, the "free market" in Australia is failing in a lot of areas.

It has failed to provide affordable housing, affordable insurance and affordable energy which has necessitated government intervention in all those areas.

I also think that they haven't done enough in all those areas.

The free market also encourages waste eg fossil fuels and food to name just two.

I'm certainly not advocating Marxism but I believe that there is a need for properly executed government planning in the provision of essential services to avoid kneejerk reactions and excessive power and price gouging by monopolies.

Trouble is that current governments (Federal and State) seem more interested in advancing the interests of social minorities than dealing with the inherent faults in the economic system that are dragging us all down, ie increasingly unaffordable prices for essential goods and services brought about by too high a reliance on commercial entities, and they need to lift their game in that regard by putting the consumers before the interests of big business.

 

[sptrawler]

Agreed subject to that being in a long term context not a short term one.

Many of the problems of today I can recall very well being discussed in the 1990's that the seeds were being sown back then with decisions made at the time. 30 years later and here we are.

The only way that can be changed is by changing the tax system, so that it taxes more efficiently and deploys those taxes so that the economy can grow in a sustainable manner.
ATM we have a hand to mouth tax system, that doesn't support growth and is dependent on finite resources, sooner or later that will collapse and with it our welfare state IMO.

 

[SirRumpole]

Just a quick observation, Albo turned up in the cricket commentary box during the Sydney Test and said he was back at work!

Some job.