No, that one I don’t think you can change rapidly due to the servicing cost.T_R wrote:So you'll be campaigning against Labor's negative gearing changes, since they are further entrenching unfairness?
The Politics Thread 2019
Moderator: GH Moderators
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
Bless
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
Resorting to condescension and ridicule - TR 101
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
Im not allowed to be amused by your frantic hair splitting?
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
I dont know much about this, and didnt care too, but i've read up a bit today since im on a course at work which is mind numbingly boring...
but this seems like an entirely reasonable compromise. People have spent 20 years working towards a strategy offered up and encouraged by the government and now they want to to cut the guts out and potentially **** a bunch of people who simply followed the direction of the Government of the Day...
And yes, not all legislative changes should have "no losers", sometimes it's unavoidable. But in this case, it's totally avoidable. You can still go through with your change without risking ANYONE being **** over. Grandfathering it in seems like the most fair and reasonable way to move forward with this, if that's the policy they want to go forward with.
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
Pigman, being reasonable is no way to promote the politics of envy
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
The reality to this is, of course, that this will just push people into investing with companies that provide unfranked dividends, most likely disbursed into family trusts for year levelling, ensuring that the government won't see an extra brass razoo from the whole painful exercise.
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
It’s a legitimate distinction, but you don’t seem able to pass up another opportunity to be a condescending ****...T_R wrote:Im not allowed to be amused by your frantic hair splitting?
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
Again the question I asked above. How exactly are people being **** over? Because they *may* need to rebalance their portfolio? This change doesn’t invalidate investing for your retirement.Pigman wrote: but this seems like an entirely reasonable compromise. People have spent 20 years working towards a strategy offered up and encouraged by the government and now they want to to cut the guts out and potentially **** a bunch of people who simply followed the direction of the Government of the Day...
And yes, not all legislative changes should have "no losers", sometimes it's unavoidable. But in this case, it's totally avoidable. You can still go through with your change without risking ANYONE being **** over. Grandfathering it in seems like the most fair and reasonable way to move forward with this, if that's the policy they want to go forward with.
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
Because people have planned for their retirement on the basis of certain expectations put in place by the government. Its not necessary to change this policy overnight, and exemptions are already in place for pension recipients. Why is it so urgent to change this for self funded retirees, but not pressing at all for pension recipients?gangrenous wrote:Again the question I asked above. How exactly are people being **** over? Because they *may* need to rebalance their portfolio? This change doesn’t invalidate investing for your retirement.Pigman wrote: but this seems like an entirely reasonable compromise. People have spent 20 years working towards a strategy offered up and encouraged by the government and now they want to to cut the guts out and potentially **** a bunch of people who simply followed the direction of the Government of the Day...
And yes, not all legislative changes should have "no losers", sometimes it's unavoidable. But in this case, it's totally avoidable. You can still go through with your change without risking ANYONE being **** over. Grandfathering it in seems like the most fair and reasonable way to move forward with this, if that's the policy they want to go forward with.
Hint: Its because one group are Liberal voters, and it plays well with the base to do 'em over. It's not about economics, it's Bill The Workers Friend strutting with his best Western Sydney strine.
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
So what about their retirement plans are in tatters? Hit me with a realistic example where a person is strongly adversely affected beyond losing a benefit they’ve enjoyed?T_R wrote:Because people have planned for their retirement on the basis of certain expectations put in place by the government. Its not necessary to change this policy overnight, and exemptions are already in place for pension recipients. Why is it so urgent to change this for self funded retirees, but not pressing at all for pension recipients?gangrenous wrote:Again the question I asked above. How exactly are people being **** over? Because they *may* need to rebalance their portfolio? This change doesn’t invalidate investing for your retirement.Pigman wrote: but this seems like an entirely reasonable compromise. People have spent 20 years working towards a strategy offered up and encouraged by the government and now they want to to cut the guts out and potentially **** a bunch of people who simply followed the direction of the Government of the Day...
And yes, not all legislative changes should have "no losers", sometimes it's unavoidable. But in this case, it's totally avoidable. You can still go through with your change without risking ANYONE being **** over. Grandfathering it in seems like the most fair and reasonable way to move forward with this, if that's the policy they want to go forward with.
Hint: Its because one group are Liberal voters, and it plays well with the base to do 'em over. It's not about economics, it's Bill The Workers Friend strutting with his best Western Sydney strine.
What would they have done differently had they known this would end?
Why is it urgent for self-funded retirees and not pensioners? Because one group is sitting on stacks of cash and receiving the lions share of $5B from the government? Which the opposition no doubt would like to use for election promises on hospitals and schools.
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
Gee, you're very cavalier with other people's money, aren't you!
An example? Well, how about someone who's entire Super is invested in franked dividend-returning shares? You know, someone who relies on this entirely for their income, as many do? You think they might be a teensy little bit inconvenienced by this? Maybe?
As for you your second magnificent paragraph...there's just about nothing there that is true. Good effort. Firstly, anyone taking advantage of this scheme is earning an income at or under the tax free threshold, so they are not rolling around naked in piles of money contemplating their next helicopter purchase. And of course people taking a pension are costing the government more than the relatively small number of people accessing this scheme. As for the hospital and schools....really? Have you thought it only to that point? You realise that this money will be reinvested in unfranked investment, and the government STILL won't be getting the returns? The only difference is that people will be forced to divest shares within a timeframe unlikely to be to their advantage.
I'm going to guess you don't have the slightest clue as to the revenue difference it would make to roll this out over, say, 5 years, to allow a decent chance to maximise the return on the sale of shares, or build in a reasonable grandfathering provision. But you are so used to guzzling the Labor bathwater that you'll die in a ditch defending the policy anyway.
You need to stop parroting Bill's lines and get your calculator out for second. The implementation of this policy - not the policy, but the way they are doing it - is just bastardry, and you know it. I am constantly amazed at how your bleeding heart outlook never stretches to Bill's class enemies.
An example? Well, how about someone who's entire Super is invested in franked dividend-returning shares? You know, someone who relies on this entirely for their income, as many do? You think they might be a teensy little bit inconvenienced by this? Maybe?
As for you your second magnificent paragraph...there's just about nothing there that is true. Good effort. Firstly, anyone taking advantage of this scheme is earning an income at or under the tax free threshold, so they are not rolling around naked in piles of money contemplating their next helicopter purchase. And of course people taking a pension are costing the government more than the relatively small number of people accessing this scheme. As for the hospital and schools....really? Have you thought it only to that point? You realise that this money will be reinvested in unfranked investment, and the government STILL won't be getting the returns? The only difference is that people will be forced to divest shares within a timeframe unlikely to be to their advantage.
I'm going to guess you don't have the slightest clue as to the revenue difference it would make to roll this out over, say, 5 years, to allow a decent chance to maximise the return on the sale of shares, or build in a reasonable grandfathering provision. But you are so used to guzzling the Labor bathwater that you'll die in a ditch defending the policy anyway.
You need to stop parroting Bill's lines and get your calculator out for second. The implementation of this policy - not the policy, but the way they are doing it - is just bastardry, and you know it. I am constantly amazed at how your bleeding heart outlook never stretches to Bill's class enemies.
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
The Politics Thread 2018
“Treasury has found that 90 per cent of the refunds accruing to superannuation are claimed by self-managed superannuation funds.T_R wrote: As for you your second magnificent paragraph...there's just about nothing there that is true. Good effort. Firstly, anyone taking advantage of this scheme is earning an income at or under the tax free threshold, so they are not rolling around naked in piles of money contemplating their next helicopter purchase.
The Parliamentary Budget Office analysed the impact of the policy on this sector, finding that in 2014-15, 201,439 self-managed superannuation funds claimed almost $2.6 billion worth of excess franking credits.
The bottom half by fund balance claimed just 6.4 per cent of the total value, compared to more than half claimed by the top 10 per cent of funds with balances of more than $2.4 million.” - https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-30/ ... y/10626204
So we’ve got what at least 1.3 billion claimed by SMSFs with more than $2.4 M sitting just in their Super fund. Plus however much their house(s) are worth etc. etc.
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
And that's the 'lion's share' of $5billion?
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
The Politics Thread 2018
That’s the top end, looks like about 90% of that 2.6 B is for balances over 750K and again that is only the amount in the Super Fund. Which is about 30 years worth of the couple pension just burning straight down with no interest, no other assets, nor drawing a pension once assets are sufficiently depleted.
So that’s nearly half accounted for by people who are at minimum solidly wealthy. There don’t appear to be good stats on the wealth of the other half outside of self managed super funds, but I think it’s safe to say you’ll see similar things in industry managed funds.
Either way your ridicule was and is misplaced.
So that’s nearly half accounted for by people who are at minimum solidly wealthy. There don’t appear to be good stats on the wealth of the other half outside of self managed super funds, but I think it’s safe to say you’ll see similar things in industry managed funds.
Either way your ridicule was and is misplaced.
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
I dont think so. Your $750k at a healthy 5% return is, as I said, bouncing along the tax free threshold, especially with inflation taken into account
And you still haven't managed a reply to the benefit of simply slowing the implementation to minimise the impact on retirees.
And you still haven't managed a reply to the benefit of simply slowing the implementation to minimise the impact on retirees.
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
The Politics Thread 2018
And as I already said, thats the bottom of the cohort, that’s one component of their assets, the point isn’t to take the $750K to heaven with you, and it’s still 30 years of the current pension.T_R wrote:I dont think so. Your $750k at a healthy 5% return is, as I said, bouncing along the tax free threshold, especially with inflation taken into account
And you still haven't managed a reply to the benefit of simply slowing the implementation to minimise the impact on retirees.
As I said earlier in the thread, I don’t think the implementation is perfect. I’d certainly be open to a phased approach, particularly if it was practical to tier based on fund balance.
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
You weren't yesterday.gangrenous wrote:And as I already said, thats the bottom of the cohort, that’s one component of their assets, the point isn’t to take the $750K to heaven with you, and it’s still 30 years of the current pension.T_R wrote:I dont think so. Your $750k at a healthy 5% return is, as I said, bouncing along the tax free threshold, especially with inflation taken into account
And you still haven't managed a reply to the benefit of simply slowing the implementation to minimise the impact on retirees.
As I said earlier in the thread, I don’t think the implementation is perfect. I’d certainly be open to a phased approach, particularly if it was practical to tier based on fund balance.
But good for you. Its not bad policy to ditch it, it's just a completely **** act to do it without some prep time.
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
The Politics Thread 2018
I don’t believe I said that. What I am is still unconvinced that the lack of grandfathering is hugely impactful, certainly to the level of screaming at the horror.
I could be convinced by actual numbers, but my gut feel is that either your earnings and refund are modest, in which case you’re probably quibbling round the edges of when you hit pension entitlement by a year or two. Or you’re getting a sizeable return on a large pocket of wealth, in which case we’re looking at upper class tax breaks/welfare.
Arguably there has been a somewhat of a transition period by Labor having the guts to announce policies in opposition. How long ago was it announced? How long until it would be instituted?
P.S. the minimum assets to not qualify for a part pension is 1.055 M so we know that cohort has at least that (if they’re going to be affected)
I could be convinced by actual numbers, but my gut feel is that either your earnings and refund are modest, in which case you’re probably quibbling round the edges of when you hit pension entitlement by a year or two. Or you’re getting a sizeable return on a large pocket of wealth, in which case we’re looking at upper class tax breaks/welfare.
Arguably there has been a somewhat of a transition period by Labor having the guts to announce policies in opposition. How long ago was it announced? How long until it would be instituted?
P.S. the minimum assets to not qualify for a part pension is 1.055 M so we know that cohort has at least that (if they’re going to be affected)
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
There were about 5 others arguing about this last week, where’d they all go? Just sitting round with pop corn?
Where’s Sid? Man walks in drops a bomb and walks out
Where’s Sid? Man walks in drops a bomb and walks out
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
Gangrenous, with the greatest respect for your dyed-in-the-wool commitment to the revolutionary cause, I've just finished my fourth absolutely magnificent 2004 Gran Reserva Pannepot at a brilliant little Beligan joint near Ginza Station, and I'm much too warm and fuzzy to carry on about Bill and his maoist madness this evening.
Hell, one more of the damn things and I'll be out door knocking for him.
Can I have a leave pass for tonight?
Hell, one more of the damn things and I'll be out door knocking for him.
Can I have a leave pass for tonight?
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
I’m certainly done for the evening. Well past my bed time.
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
I assumed you worked on Beijing time.
Sleep tight!
Sleep tight!
Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
- Sterlk
- David Furner
- Posts: 3257
- Joined: July 20, 2008, 10:41 am
- Location: Canberra - Raiders season ticket
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
For reasons of employment, I try not to get too publicly involved in Australian politics. I do like watching other people discuss it, though.gangrenous wrote: ↑February 21, 2019, 9:33 pm There were about 5 others arguing about this last week, where’d they all go? Just sitting round with pop corn?
I generally either:
- Prompt discussion by asking what other people think about a topic.
- Try to limit any input to nonpartisan, fact-based comments - avoiding hyperbole.
So yes, popcorn.
- Sterlk
- David Furner
- Posts: 3257
- Joined: July 20, 2008, 10:41 am
- Location: Canberra - Raiders season ticket
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
... and on that note, I must say I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the most notable news story of the week (not the Julie Biship thing).
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
It’s okay Sterlk, I know you’re a communist like me
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
Really a nothing issue. I mean who doesn't have a spare million floating around to become a majority shareholder for a company owned by a mate, who is also a liberal party donor but just coincidentally is tendering for a billion dollar government contract? Just a typical Wednesday in most households.Sterlk wrote:... and on that note, I must say I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the most notable news story of the week (not the Julie Biship thing).
Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
Shoving it in your face since 2017
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 13407
- Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
- Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
- Location: Canberra :(
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
They are taking a leaf out of the Trump play book: Refuse to apologise or take responsibility for anything; lie in the face of overwhelming evidence; and rely on News Ltd to spin it all into a web of fear mongering, hyperbole and what aboutism.gergreg wrote: ↑February 22, 2019, 8:47 amReally a nothing issue. I mean who doesn't have a spare million floating around to become a majority shareholder for a company owned by a mate, who is also a liberal party donor but just coincidentally is tendering for a billion dollar government contract? Just a typical Wednesday in most households.Sterlk wrote:... and on that note, I must say I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the most notable news story of the week (not the Julie Biship thing).
Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
- Sterlk
- David Furner
- Posts: 3257
- Joined: July 20, 2008, 10:41 am
- Location: Canberra - Raiders season ticket
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
That's... not what I was referring to.
It's amazing that the computer networks of the major parties being hacked by a foreign government isn't considered the biggest political news story of the week.
It's amazing that the computer networks of the major parties being hacked by a foreign government isn't considered the biggest political news story of the week.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
Sounds like a Tuesday?
- Sterlk
- David Furner
- Posts: 3257
- Joined: July 20, 2008, 10:41 am
- Location: Canberra - Raiders season ticket
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
I suppose it isn't salacious and have an "OMG s/he did what!?!??" effect like so many of the 'MP caught doing bad thing #258' stories we're accustomed to these days, but it's infinitely more important.
Think back to the whole Barnaby Joyce affair/baby saga, when his family was still together and his affair was under-wraps. Now imagine Nationals staff emailing each other about it, and a foreign government getting their hands on that. Instant blackmail material against a deputy prime minister: "do this thing for us or we'll ruin your marriage and your life".
It's quite possible the perpetrator for this attack is in possession of material that could influence a Labor/Liberal/National politician into doing something against Australia's interest for the benefit of a foreign government. It's an extreme example, but look at Trump and the Russians... regardless of what the truth is in that case you have the President of the United States (reportedly) telling his intelligence community something to the effect of "I don't care what you think, I believe Putin". Consider that a scary glimpse at a possible future for Australia, likely weaved a little more subtly than Mr. Trump seems to be able to manage.
Now think of all the 'market research' political parties do on Australians, compiled from databases all over the place, government and commercial. Addresses, personal interests, god knows what else...
Imagine you're a North Korean defector, you got your Australian citizenship a few years ago and love your new country. A few weeks after this happens you find a man with 'officially sanctioned haircut #3' waiting for you in your living room.
The right information in the wrong hands is some serious ****, far more so than whatever the PR disaster of the day is.
Think back to the whole Barnaby Joyce affair/baby saga, when his family was still together and his affair was under-wraps. Now imagine Nationals staff emailing each other about it, and a foreign government getting their hands on that. Instant blackmail material against a deputy prime minister: "do this thing for us or we'll ruin your marriage and your life".
It's quite possible the perpetrator for this attack is in possession of material that could influence a Labor/Liberal/National politician into doing something against Australia's interest for the benefit of a foreign government. It's an extreme example, but look at Trump and the Russians... regardless of what the truth is in that case you have the President of the United States (reportedly) telling his intelligence community something to the effect of "I don't care what you think, I believe Putin". Consider that a scary glimpse at a possible future for Australia, likely weaved a little more subtly than Mr. Trump seems to be able to manage.
Now think of all the 'market research' political parties do on Australians, compiled from databases all over the place, government and commercial. Addresses, personal interests, god knows what else...
Imagine you're a North Korean defector, you got your Australian citizenship a few years ago and love your new country. A few weeks after this happens you find a man with 'officially sanctioned haircut #3' waiting for you in your living room.
The right information in the wrong hands is some serious ****, far more so than whatever the PR disaster of the day is.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16586
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
I don’t doubt it’s seriousness. I just assumed our politicians were so incompetent they’d be fairly regularly hacked.
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
Why waste so much effort on cyber attacks when they could just duck down to Portia's for lunch and listen in to their conversations? But seriously it is a big issue that gets worse every year.
Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
Shoving it in your face since 2017
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
To go back on topic.
IMO this is a result of a such a regressive tax system that starts of at 0 and climbs far far to high.
If you have a tax system where the bottom rate is the same as the company rate you don’t have this problem.
1 - there is no refund from franking credit and no double tax paid.
2 - lazy bums learn how to pay tax from their first dollar.
3 - middle class has more money going into retirement because they have been taxed less along the way.
4 - trust distributions lose their effect because there is no pissant tax rates followed quickly by thieving tax rates.
For all the communists out there that need to take a little bit extra off the wealthy then take it off the wealthy.
Start upping your tax rate at 1M and then every million after that and hAve proper levers to protect against inflation and bracket creep.
IMO this is a result of a such a regressive tax system that starts of at 0 and climbs far far to high.
If you have a tax system where the bottom rate is the same as the company rate you don’t have this problem.
1 - there is no refund from franking credit and no double tax paid.
2 - lazy bums learn how to pay tax from their first dollar.
3 - middle class has more money going into retirement because they have been taxed less along the way.
4 - trust distributions lose their effect because there is no pissant tax rates followed quickly by thieving tax rates.
For all the communists out there that need to take a little bit extra off the wealthy then take it off the wealthy.
Start upping your tax rate at 1M and then every million after that and hAve proper levers to protect against inflation and bracket creep.
Re: The Politics Thread 2018
Also on another note why does the bloke who sits on benefits all day smoking cones have a vote that is worth the same as a guy raising his family paying a **** in taxes trying to improve the lives of everyone around him?
I have never understood how that can be reconciled with our evolution, in any other setting the peanut self interest lazy entity would never have the equal day in the tribe as those keeping the tribe fed?
I have never understood how that can be reconciled with our evolution, in any other setting the peanut self interest lazy entity would never have the equal day in the tribe as those keeping the tribe fed?