The Politics Thread 2019

Discuss all the events of the day

Moderator: GH Moderators

User avatar
Sterlk
John Ferguson
Posts: 2919
Joined: July 20, 2008, 10:41 am
Location: Canberra - Raiders season ticket

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Sterlk » May 19, 2019, 1:51 pm

greeneyed wrote:
May 18, 2019, 2:02 pm
It was the same in the ACT... you had to pick six if you voted above the line in the Senate... and there were really only two options I was comfortable putting a number beside. I've never felt so disinclined to vote... with no party really espousing sensible economic policy in combination with progressive views on social issues.
I numbered the entire lot above the line, think there was 7 total. You start out with who you like most, then end with who you most despise.

Best to keep going if you want to get the most bang out of your political buck. Not so much an issue in the ACT, but when you start getting more boxes above the line... thieves are better than murderers (metaphorically).
:!: Warning: poster is incapable of humour, engage with at your own risk. Symptoms of engagement may include frustration, mental imbalance and temporary insanity.

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 42731
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by The Rickman » May 19, 2019, 1:58 pm

Hey Sterlk, you’ve got your finger on the political button more than most... did you see this result coming?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
PigRickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 24602
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by PigRickman » May 19, 2019, 2:06 pm

T_R wrote:
May 19, 2019, 12:27 pm
Northern Raider wrote:
The Rickman wrote:
May 19, 2019, 9:33 am
Make no mistake people, yesterday’s result was a great one for our nation. Australia pretty much overwhelmingly said NO to racism, we’ve voted out Hanson and Anning, said goodbye to Tony Abbot and Clive Palmer, yet stated we want a strong Liberal party in charge of the economy. That’s a good thing

And before you get started on climate change, Labor really wasn’t going to do anything significant in that sphere anyway

The people have spoken
GetUp focused on ousting Tony Abbott and were successful in doing so. Classic case of winning the battle but losing the war. They channeled their efforts into a couple of electorates (they failed with Oakeshott). End result is the LNP have retained power and GetUp have removed the pebble in their shoe. ScoMo will be far more secure in his leadership in this coming term without Abbott's destabilising influence.
GetUp spent an estimated $12m to get rid of Abbott, and an estimated $10m to fail to get rid of Dutton.

$22m to roll one Member, who may well have been on the way out anyway.

That's a fairly questionable use of funds if you ask me.
So between them GetUp and Clive spent 100m for a return of a single independent seat that probably falls with or without the injection of funds.
Marrrrrrrrrrrrrone. Tough scenes indeed
The List - K.Love, Keno, Zippy's tennis angels, LA Lakers, Noah, Boozer, Lucy's horse tips, Colts, Lucy, Kevin Proctor, Dr Zaius, TR, Tinfoil hatted Gangers and Woody, anyone in Raiders HQ who can point to QBN on a map....

Matt wrote:
July 18, 2018, 3:49 pm
Edrick Lee 5. Jordan Rapana
Matt wrote:
June 25, 2019, 9:29 pm
Reed Mahoney 9. Josh Hodgson ©
Coaching Power Rankings: Ricky Stuart - Top 2, and he ain't 2.

User avatar
Sterlk
John Ferguson
Posts: 2919
Joined: July 20, 2008, 10:41 am
Location: Canberra - Raiders season ticket

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Sterlk » May 19, 2019, 2:13 pm

The Senate is going to be interesting, I think - here's an ABC prediction somebody screencapped:

Image

You need 39 to pass anything. LNP + One Nation + Bernadi = 37.

Seems like nothing's getting through without support from either Labor / Greens / Centre Alliance. Lambie alone wouldn't be enough, but she seems to be pledging to not give the Coalition an inch in any case.
:!: Warning: poster is incapable of humour, engage with at your own risk. Symptoms of engagement may include frustration, mental imbalance and temporary insanity.

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 21925
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Northern Raider » May 19, 2019, 2:44 pm

Sterlk wrote:
May 19, 2019, 2:13 pm
The Senate is going to be interesting, I think - here's an ABC prediction somebody screencapped:

Image

You need 39 to pass anything. LNP + One Nation + Bernadi = 37.

Seems like nothing's getting through without support from either Labor / Greens / Centre Alliance. Lambie alone wouldn't be enough, but she seems to be pledging to not give the Coalition an inch in any case.
A situation we've been very familiar with this past few years. The onus is really on Labor here. Greens oppose every LNP legislation cuz that's how they roll. Labor need to be more selective about the battles they fight.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
Sterlk
John Ferguson
Posts: 2919
Joined: July 20, 2008, 10:41 am
Location: Canberra - Raiders season ticket

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Sterlk » May 19, 2019, 2:58 pm

The Rickman wrote:
May 19, 2019, 1:58 pm
Hey Sterlk, you’ve got your finger on the political button more than most... did you see this result coming?
I did not. I looked at the bookies for my prediction, which imploded spectacularly. Sportsbet was so confident Labor would win they paid out bets early, and then also had to pay out on the subsequent Coalition win.

In retrospect, trying to claw anything back, whether or not it truly is excessive - it's a dangerous game. As the analysts are saying in the wash, Labor had so much detailed information out there that people struggled to make sense of it all; very susceptible to a scare campaign... and here we are.

I think Labor would have won if they'd drawn a hard line in the sand detailing who their policies would impact, which could've blunted the scare campaign. What they ended up with by not doing this was a bunch of to-and-fro about the small-time working class investors and retirees getting crushed, which I'd argue killed them in the end.

For example:
  • No negative gearing for investors with over $3m worth of assets
  • Capital gains tax discount decreases to %25 for investors with over $3m worth of assets
(I'm picking a random number that sounds big, for this)

IMO it's a lot harder to make a case that people with $squillions in assets need the handouts; people would've looked at something like that and thought "I don't have $3m, and I'll never have that much. I'm in the clear!" - and that would've made all the difference.
:!: Warning: poster is incapable of humour, engage with at your own risk. Symptoms of engagement may include frustration, mental imbalance and temporary insanity.

User avatar
gangrenous
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9381
Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by gangrenous » May 19, 2019, 3:19 pm

Yo papabear, you asked for a detailed response on climate change. I gave you one and *crickets*

You wonder why people hadn’t bothered.

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 21925
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Northern Raider » May 19, 2019, 3:21 pm

Labor went in policy heavy which left them exposed to attack and they weren't prepared to defend. Whether it was arrogance about their position, underestimating the other side, not really understanding the detail themselves or a bit of all.

Thing is their policies proved easy to run a simplistic scared campaign against. Examples are:

Abolishing negative gearing = devaluing you property and/or driving up rents
Franking credits = taking away your retirement money

Then there's the big one of not being able to address the cost of their climate change policies. Dodging around a straight answer put them on the back foot early and never really recovered. It was their equivalent of Hewson's GST on a cake.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 42731
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by The Rickman » May 19, 2019, 3:23 pm

I’m telling you people, and I’ve been telling you since Day Dot... Labor lost because of Shorten. It’s as simple as that


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 21925
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Northern Raider » May 19, 2019, 3:33 pm

The Rickman wrote:
May 19, 2019, 3:23 pm
I’m telling you people, and I’ve been telling you since Day Dot... Labor lost because of Shorten. It’s as simple as that


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's the main reason. The other factors mentioned are why they couldn't overcome the general distaste for Shorten.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15666
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by T_R » May 19, 2019, 4:00 pm

Here's another thought. Shorten ran on a narrative that 'you're not doing as well as you'd like because of 'the big end of town'. So, I'm going to take the money from them and use it to give you lots of things for free'.... pretty much the union rally stump speech.

But when you drilled down a bit, a hell of a lot of the people who were going to be paying were 'traditional' Labor voters - there's one hell of a lot of tradies and blue collar workers in this country on $200k, and there's a hell of a lot more of them who aspire to it.

And the Labor policies to that group were all take, and no give - a complete removal from the Hawke Keating days where everyone contributed a bit and everyone received something.

The message that ' if you do well, you're the enemy and we're going to take it off you' is a pretty ugly one to aspirational folk ... and I think it showed.

Not the only factor, and not the biggest, but I think his class warfare rhetoric was thrown back in his face.
Image

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.

User avatar
Sterlk
John Ferguson
Posts: 2919
Joined: July 20, 2008, 10:41 am
Location: Canberra - Raiders season ticket

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Sterlk » May 19, 2019, 4:05 pm

Northern Raider wrote:
May 19, 2019, 2:44 pm
Sterlk wrote:
May 19, 2019, 2:13 pm
The Senate is going to be interesting, I think - here's an ABC prediction somebody screencapped:

You need 39 to pass anything. LNP + One Nation + Bernadi = 37.

Seems like nothing's getting through without support from either Labor / Greens / Centre Alliance. Lambie alone wouldn't be enough, but she seems to be pledging to not give the Coalition an inch in any case.
A situation we've been very familiar with this past few years. The onus is really on Labor here. Greens oppose every LNP legislation cuz that's how they roll. Labor need to be more selective about the battles they fight.
I'm not sure it's incumbent on any opposition to give a government free passes just because the numbers are tight.

If asked how the lower/upper houses are supposed to work, regardless of who's in power, I'd say this:
House of Representatives
Doesn't have proportional representation. Denies a voice to the not-insubstantial number of voters who don't preference a major party, but it does this with its 'winner take all' election methodology in order to select an organised group that can make up the country's political executive, as well as set and drive an agenda for the country.

Senate
Has proportional representation. Provides an elected body that more accurately represents the makeup of the electorate as a whole, with the expectation that such diversity comes at the cost of a single-cohesive direction - so they act as a check on power.
The House, representing the electorate's most commonly held values (most common =/= majority), sets an agenda and puts forth proposals. The Senate, representing the political diversity of the entire electorate (and thus, 51%+ of the population), considers/amends/approves/rejects those proposals.

No government has a mandate to do ANYTHING unless they have a majority in the Senate. Something passing through Senate is approval from a majority of the country, something passing through the House is a victory for the loudest voice. Keating's "unrepresentative swill" descriptor for the Senate, in general, is complete garbage... that tag would be more accurately ascribed to the House.

In the end, it is the responsibility of a government to set and/or negotiate an agenda that will pass the Senate - the fairest deal is often reached when neither side is completely happy. If a government can't get something through the Senate, they've failed to offer/negotiate something that the majority of the country can accept, and whatever they're selling should rightly be stopped in its tracks.

TL;DR - failure to get something through the Senate is a failure of a government, not an opposition party.
:!: Warning: poster is incapable of humour, engage with at your own risk. Symptoms of engagement may include frustration, mental imbalance and temporary insanity.

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 42731
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by The Rickman » May 19, 2019, 4:12 pm

Let’s not also forget that a large majority of the mining industry are traditionally Labor voters, and there’s not a chance in hell most of them votes Labor and the Greens this election


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
papabear
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6109
Joined: August 27, 2007, 2:26 pm
Location: redfern

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by papabear » May 19, 2019, 5:07 pm

gangrenous wrote:
May 19, 2019, 3:19 pm
Yo papabear, you asked for a detailed response on climate change. I gave you one and *crickets*

You wonder why people hadn’t bothered.
Sorry mate didn’t see it.

Unless it was the big post with the roosters analogy

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 21925
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Northern Raider » May 19, 2019, 5:13 pm

Sterlk wrote:
May 19, 2019, 4:05 pm
Northern Raider wrote:
May 19, 2019, 2:44 pm
Sterlk wrote:
May 19, 2019, 2:13 pm
The Senate is going to be interesting, I think - here's an ABC prediction somebody screencapped:

You need 39 to pass anything. LNP + One Nation + Bernadi = 37.

Seems like nothing's getting through without support from either Labor / Greens / Centre Alliance. Lambie alone wouldn't be enough, but she seems to be pledging to not give the Coalition an inch in any case.
A situation we've been very familiar with this past few years. The onus is really on Labor here. Greens oppose every LNP legislation cuz that's how they roll. Labor need to be more selective about the battles they fight.
I'm not sure it's incumbent on any opposition to give a government free passes just because the numbers are tight.

If asked how the lower/upper houses are supposed to work, regardless of who's in power, I'd say this:
House of Representatives
Doesn't have proportional representation. Denies a voice to the not-insubstantial number of voters who don't preference a major party, but it does this with its 'winner take all' election methodology in order to select an organised group that can make up the country's political executive, as well as set and drive an agenda for the country.

Senate
Has proportional representation. Provides an elected body that more accurately represents the makeup of the electorate as a whole, with the expectation that such diversity comes at the cost of a single-cohesive direction - so they act as a check on power.
The House, representing the electorate's most commonly held values (most common =/= majority), sets an agenda and puts forth proposals. The Senate, representing the political diversity of the entire electorate (and thus, 51%+ of the population), considers/amends/approves/rejects those proposals.

No government has a mandate to do ANYTHING unless they have a majority in the Senate. Something passing through Senate is approval from a majority of the country, something passing through the House is a victory for the loudest voice. Keating's "unrepresentative swill" descriptor for the Senate, in general, is complete garbage... that tag would be more accurately ascribed to the House.

In the end, it is the responsibility of a government to set and/or negotiate an agenda that will pass the Senate - the fairest deal is often reached when neither side is completely happy. If a government can't get something through the Senate, they've failed to offer/negotiate something that the majority of the country can accept, and whatever they're selling should rightly be stopped in its tracks.

TL;DR - failure to get something through the Senate is a failure of a government, not an opposition party.
I understand the role of the senate. What I was referring to was a "block everything" mentality by the left wing block. That effectively hands all the power to those select few that hold the balance. If the ALP are selective about what they pass through they will have greater leverage on those issue they choose to fight.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
papabear
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6109
Joined: August 27, 2007, 2:26 pm
Location: redfern

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by papabear » May 19, 2019, 5:14 pm

Sterlk wrote:
May 19, 2019, 4:05 pm
Northern Raider wrote:
May 19, 2019, 2:44 pm
Sterlk wrote:
May 19, 2019, 2:13 pm
The Senate is going to be interesting, I think - here's an ABC prediction somebody screencapped:

You need 39 to pass anything. LNP + One Nation + Bernadi = 37.

Seems like nothing's getting through without support from either Labor / Greens / Centre Alliance. Lambie alone wouldn't be enough, but she seems to be pledging to not give the Coalition an inch in any case.
A situation we've been very familiar with this past few years. The onus is really on Labor here. Greens oppose every LNP legislation cuz that's how they roll. Labor need to be more selective about the battles they fight.
I'm not sure it's incumbent on any opposition to give a government free passes just because the numbers are tight.

If asked how the lower/upper houses are supposed to work, regardless of who's in power, I'd say this:
House of Representatives
Doesn't have proportional representation. Denies a voice to the not-insubstantial number of voters who don't preference a major party, but it does this with its 'winner take all' election methodology in order to select an organised group that can make up the country's political executive, as well as set and drive an agenda for the country.

Senate
Has proportional representation. Provides an elected body that more accurately represents the makeup of the electorate as a whole, with the expectation that such diversity comes at the cost of a single-cohesive direction - so they act as a check on power.
The House, representing the electorate's most commonly held values (most common =/= majority), sets an agenda and puts forth proposals. The Senate, representing the political diversity of the entire electorate (and thus, 51%+ of the population), considers/amends/approves/rejects those proposals.

No government has a mandate to do ANYTHING unless they have a majority in the Senate. Something passing through Senate is approval from a majority of the country, something passing through the House is a victory for the loudest voice. Keating's "unrepresentative swill" descriptor for the Senate, in general, is complete garbage... that tag would be more accurately ascribed to the House.

In the end, it is the responsibility of a government to set and/or negotiate an agenda that will pass the Senate - the fairest deal is often reached when neither side is completely happy. If a government can't get something through the Senate, they've failed to offer/negotiate something that the majority of the country can accept, and whatever they're selling should rightly be stopped in its tracks.

TL;DR - failure to get something through the Senate is a failure of a government, not an opposition party.
Imo this is garbage for one the senate is less representative the house of reps due to state vote distortion with nsw voting in 6 senators and Tasmania also have long 6 senators. Which let’s be honest the smaller states ( tas / sa) do seem to do a bit more greens and labor then the states with people (except for our friendly victorians).

Also as to whose fault it is if laws don’t get through. Laws not getting through isn’t a problem unless they are good laws.

If labor / greens / lambie are blocking garbage laws then good on them. However if they are blocking good laws such as tax cuts to higher brackets then they deserve the blame they get.

Sooner or later, like Kevin did / pretended to do, if labor want to win they have to get out of the inner city bull crap and in to the middle.

gergreg
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6744
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by gergreg » May 19, 2019, 5:21 pm

T_R wrote:Here's another thought. Shorten ran on a narrative that 'you're not doing as well as you'd like because of 'the big end of town'. So, I'm going to take the money from them and use it to give you lots of things for free'.... pretty much the union rally stump speech.

But when you drilled down a bit, a hell of a lot of the people who were going to be paying were 'traditional' Labor voters - there's one hell of a lot of tradies and blue collar workers in this country on $200k, and there's a hell of a lot more of them who aspire to it.

And the Labor policies to that group were all take, and no give - a complete removal from the Hawke Keating days where everyone contributed a bit and everyone received something.

The message that ' if you do well, you're the enemy and we're going to take it off you' is a pretty ugly one to aspirational folk ... and I think it showed.

Not the only factor, and not the biggest, but I think his class warfare rhetoric was thrown back in his face.
Let's face it. The average voter is dumb. The Liberals ran a negativity campaign, which has been proven to be very effective. Abbott did it and subsequent Liberal campaigns have been similar.

Really what is this govt going to do in the next 3 years? The answer is whatever they want, because they haven't really disclosed a great deal. When asked directly the response hasn't been . . 'this is what we're going to do' .... It has been 'this is what we're not going to do.... Bill Shorten bla bla'..

I say the average voter is dumb because 6 months from now when the Liberal party actually show their hand and piss off a certain demographic - that demographic will be in complete uproar because they've essentially been duped but that is on them. Too dumb to realise that that is how it has played out before. Remember that budget that Hockey shoved in people's faces which basically pissed off the majority of the country and heaps of people wanted them removed from govt - it's still the same party in power - it's baffling.

The Labor party is stupid. They're too dumb to realise that all they had to do was take a leaf out of the Liberal playbook, say nothing and highlight how inept the govt has been for the past few years. It sucks because I don't want to see politics like that but clearly it's a winning strategy. As a voter you should be able to go into a polling booth knowing what each party represent and their mandate for the next 3 years. Instead we have a govt which won by scaring the population into not voting for the other guy. It's why so many people are not engaged in politics.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

Shoving it in your face since 2017

User avatar
Northern Raider
Mal Meninga
Posts: 21925
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Favourite Player: Dean Lance
Location: Greener pastures

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Northern Raider » May 19, 2019, 6:32 pm

Big question now is will SoMo be the first PM to see out their full term since John Howard?
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.

User avatar
PigRickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 24602
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by PigRickman » May 19, 2019, 7:20 pm

Northern Raider wrote:
May 19, 2019, 6:32 pm
Big question now is will SoMo be the first PM to see out their full term since John Howard?
With the new policy in house there it's going to be VERY difficult to oust him. And frankly i dont have any love for the man but good. I dont think anyone should be ousting sitting PM's without some SERIOUSLY significant reasons.

They've got to get 2/3rds of the room to agree before they can change a leader. That's going to be near impossible to get the numbers for a coup.

The people voted ScoMo in... let him see the term and in 3 years time we'll see.
I think this is the end of PM merry-go-round... both parties have made significant policy changes to really make the Bull of the last 8 years is long in the past.
The List - K.Love, Keno, Zippy's tennis angels, LA Lakers, Noah, Boozer, Lucy's horse tips, Colts, Lucy, Kevin Proctor, Dr Zaius, TR, Tinfoil hatted Gangers and Woody, anyone in Raiders HQ who can point to QBN on a map....

Matt wrote:
July 18, 2018, 3:49 pm
Edrick Lee 5. Jordan Rapana
Matt wrote:
June 25, 2019, 9:29 pm
Reed Mahoney 9. Josh Hodgson ©
Coaching Power Rankings: Ricky Stuart - Top 2, and he ain't 2.

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15666
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by T_R » May 19, 2019, 7:23 pm

Ah, 'the average voter is dumb' .... the cry of someone who considers themselves so very, very much more than average.
Image

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.

Fuifui Bradbrad
Ruben Wiki
Posts: 5702
Joined: May 3, 2008, 10:23 pm
Favourite Player: Denan Kemp
Location: Penrith, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Fuifui Bradbrad » May 19, 2019, 7:26 pm

Yeah exactly. I think we will some stability we haven’t had in years.

Sam Dastyari is saying he wants to see Penny Wong take the Labour leadership. Albo and Tanya being too left-winged to lead Labour. Be interesting to see who they go with.


Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Feel free to call me RickyRicky StickStick if you like. I will also accept Super Fui, King Brad, Kid Dynamite, Chocolate-Thunda... or Brad.

gergreg
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6744
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by gergreg » May 19, 2019, 7:36 pm

T_R wrote:Ah, 'the average voter is dumb' .... the cry of someone who considers themselves so very, very much more than average.
And the context I included around that comment? Ah don't bother. The smug **** suggesting another poster is a smug ****.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

Shoving it in your face since 2017

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15666
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by T_R » May 19, 2019, 7:38 pm

gergreg wrote:
T_R wrote:Ah, 'the average voter is dumb' .... the cry of someone who considers themselves so very, very much more than average.
And the context I included around that comment? Ah don't bother. The smug **** suggesting another poster is a smug ****.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
I would never make a statement like that.
Image

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.

User avatar
Raider47
David Furner
Posts: 3089
Joined: April 15, 2009, 10:38 am
Favourite Player: Ruben Wiki
Location: Canberra

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Raider47 » May 19, 2019, 8:12 pm

Pretty sad indictment on the state of Australian Politics that all it takes is small target policy or better yet not offering any policy agenda. Scare campaigns is now the greatest election tactic. Don’t get me wrong, Labor is a victim of its bold agenda and policy and Shorten’s lack of popularity, however I’d love nothing more to say it’s only a matter of time before Libs tactics and lack thereof policy catch up with them. But then again, I am overestimating Australia.

The greatest irony is that arguably the most popular and greatest politician of our time, Bob Hawke, had the boldest ideas for Australia and changed the nation forever. But with the changing political landscape of scare campaigns and tactless slandering, we will never see a PM like that again.
"It's always been Canberra, I love playing for the Raiders"- Jarrod Croker
"We’re all really excited about what’s going on here at the Raiders"- Blake Austin
"I’m very happy to have signed this extension and I love playing footy in Canberra"- Jack Wighton
"I’ve been in Canberra for a while now and it’s become a home for me"- Josh Papalii
"“The ultimate goal is to win a premiership and get Canberra back on the pedestal they belong."- Sia Soliola
"The club was eager for me to stay and I was eager to stay as well because I love it here in Canberra."- Josh Hodgson

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15666
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by T_R » May 19, 2019, 9:01 pm

Raider47 wrote:Pretty sad indictment on the state of Australian Politics that all it takes is small target policy or better yet not offering any policy agenda. Scare campaigns is now the greatest election tactic. Don’t get me wrong, Labor is a victim of its bold agenda and policy and Shorten’s lack of popularity, however I’d love nothing more to say it’s only a matter of time before Libs tactics and lack thereof policy catch up with them. But then again, I am overestimating Australia.

The greatest irony is that arguably the most popular and greatest politician of our time, Bob Hawke, had the boldest ideas for Australia and changed the nation forever. But with the changing political landscape of scare campaigns and tactless slandering, we will never see a PM like that again.
You know that famous America's Cup clip...'Any boss who sacks someone for not coming to work today is a bum...'? You know what his NEXT line was? '....though you'll have to work harder tomorrow to make up for it'.

THAT was Hawke. He never just took from anyone. There was give, there was take.

His bold ideas worked because he brought everyone along with him. You want Superannuation? You can have it ... but you have to accept a three year pay freeze. We can train you in high tech jobs ... but you have to accept the end of manufacturing subsidies.

That wasn't Shorten's message at all. Shorten told you the reason you're not making more money is that you're being cheated by the big end of town. But it's OK! I'm going to fix it! I'm going to give you higher wages, fix the climate, fund hospitals and give you great schools! But here's the kicker ... it won't cost you anything! That rich bastard I told you about, the one who got rich at your expense...Im going to make him pay!

Australia called him out, and rightly so.

Australia will buy the big idea, but it will take a much more impressive figure than Shorten to sell it.
Image

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.

User avatar
Sterlk
John Ferguson
Posts: 2919
Joined: July 20, 2008, 10:41 am
Location: Canberra - Raiders season ticket

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Sterlk » May 19, 2019, 9:09 pm

papabear wrote:
May 19, 2019, 5:14 pm
Imo this is garbage for one the senate is less representative the house of reps due to state vote distortion with nsw voting in 6 senators and Tasmania also have long 6 senators. Which let’s be honest the smaller states ( tas / sa) do seem to do a bit more greens and labor then the states with people (except for our friendly victorians).
All other things being equal - I'd probably agree that the smaller states should have less Senate seats to make geographic seat distribution more equal for the population they have. I was referring to proportional representation by ideology, though.

The Greens are probably the best example; they get around 10% of the vote nationally, and they don't get 10% of the seats in the House. They get 1, which these days makes 0.66%. Parties like One Nation also poll not-insignificantly, yet you won't find them with a presence.

Around 25% of voters select a non-major party/candidate as their first preference in the House; in 2016 something like 3.3% of HoR seats went to a non-major. In the Senate, if the ABC's predictions above are accurate, that'll be ~20% of seats going to non-majors - you'll never get an exact match, but it's a fair whack closer to representing the entire spectrum of opinions.
:!: Warning: poster is incapable of humour, engage with at your own risk. Symptoms of engagement may include frustration, mental imbalance and temporary insanity.

User avatar
PigRickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 24602
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Nick Cotric

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by PigRickman » May 19, 2019, 9:09 pm

it'll have to be one hell of an orator to successfully sell that sort of message. Good luck waiting on that historical giant to appear.
The List - K.Love, Keno, Zippy's tennis angels, LA Lakers, Noah, Boozer, Lucy's horse tips, Colts, Lucy, Kevin Proctor, Dr Zaius, TR, Tinfoil hatted Gangers and Woody, anyone in Raiders HQ who can point to QBN on a map....

Matt wrote:
July 18, 2018, 3:49 pm
Edrick Lee 5. Jordan Rapana
Matt wrote:
June 25, 2019, 9:29 pm
Reed Mahoney 9. Josh Hodgson ©
Coaching Power Rankings: Ricky Stuart - Top 2, and he ain't 2.

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 125355
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by greeneyed » May 19, 2019, 9:41 pm

Sterlk wrote:
papabear wrote:
May 19, 2019, 5:14 pm
Imo this is garbage for one the senate is less representative the house of reps due to state vote distortion with nsw voting in 6 senators and Tasmania also have long 6 senators. Which let’s be honest the smaller states ( tas / sa) do seem to do a bit more greens and labor then the states with people (except for our friendly victorians).
All other things being equal - I'd probably agree that the smaller states should have less Senate seats to make geographic seat distribution more equal for the population they have. I was referring to proportional representation by ideology, though.

The Greens are probably the best example; they get around 10% of the vote nationally, and they don't get 10% of the seats in the House. They get 1, which these days makes 0.66%. Parties like One Nation also poll not-insignificantly, yet you won't find them with a presence.

Around 25% of voters select a non-major party/candidate as their first preference in the House; in 2016 something like 3.3% of HoR seats went to a non-major. In the Senate, if the ABC's predictions above are accurate, that'll be ~20% of seats going to non-majors - you'll never get an exact match, but it's a fair whack closer to representing the entire spectrum of opinions.
Thank goodness... unless perpetual unstable government is what you want. I certainly don’t want these loopy fringe parties in a position to decide what government is in power. Just look what happens in the ACT.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Image

User avatar
Manbush
Mal Meninga
Posts: 24593
Joined: March 14, 2008, 6:55 pm
Favourite Player: Luke Turner

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by Manbush » May 20, 2019, 7:19 am

Papa why should they get blamed for blocking “good” laws such as tax cuts to higher brackets when many don’t consider that a “good” law, if they block ones like that I think they’d be acting on behalf of what many voters actually want.

Not sure if any polls similar have been done in Australia but in America the majority supported increases to higher brackets, the higher the bracket the more support it had.
"My own opinion is enough for me and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time, and anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line and kiss my ass" Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15666
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by T_R » May 20, 2019, 9:13 am

PigRickman wrote:
May 19, 2019, 9:09 pm
it'll have to be one hell of an orator to successfully sell that sort of message. Good luck waiting on that historical giant to appear.
Not really. Think about the GST. Hewson tried to implement it, but constantly stumbled. Remember him being asked to calculate the GST on a cake...? " Well, it depends if there's a sales tax on it now, or...or...if there's a sales tax on a component of it or how's it's iced..." or whatever it was. Bang, election gone.

Contrast to Howard a few years later, on the same 'gotcha' moment; "None. It's food. Next question?"

Unpopular (no one likes a new tax) policy, thoughtfully implemented but most of all, well explained.

It's possible, but wasn't for as limited a person as Shorten.

EDIT: Watch a man die, live on TV:

Image

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.

User avatar
papabear
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6109
Joined: August 27, 2007, 2:26 pm
Location: redfern

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by papabear » May 20, 2019, 9:33 am

Manbush wrote:
May 20, 2019, 7:19 am
Papa why should they get blamed for blocking “good” laws such as tax cuts to higher brackets when many don’t consider that a “good” law, if they block ones like that I think they’d be acting on behalf of what many voters actually want.

Not sure if any polls similar have been done in Australia but in America the majority supported increases to higher brackets, the higher the bracket the more support it had.
Apples and oranges my friend.

Keep in mind they do have state income taxes with communist states such as california taking an extra up to 13% of the top and free states like the free land of Texas and another few at 0%. There is a whole range but you can probably average it out at a couple of percent.

Americas Tax rates

Tax rate Single Head of household
10% Up to $9,525 Up to $13,600
12% $9,526 to $38,700 $13,601 to $51,800
22% $38,701 to $82,500 $51,801 to $82,500
24% $82,501 to $157,500 $82,501 to $157,500
32% $157,501 to $200,000 $157,501 to $200,000
35% $200,001 to $500,000 $200,001 to $500,000
37% $500,001 or more $500,001 or more
Tax rate Married filing jointly or qualifying widow Married filing separately
10% Up to $19,050 Up to $9,525
12% $19,051 to $77,400 $9,525 to $38,700
22% $77,401 to $165,000 $38,701 to $82,500
24% $165,001 to $315,000 $82,501 to $157,000
32% $315,001 to $400,000 $157,001 to $200,000
35% $400,001 to $600,000 $200,001 to $300,000
37% $600,001 or more $300,001 or more

Australias Tax rates
$0 – $18,200 Nil
$18,201– $37,000 19c for each $1 over $18,200
$37,001 - $90,000 $3,572 plus 32.5c for each $1 over $37,000
$90,001 - $180,000 $20,797 plus 37c for each $1 over $90,000
$180,001 and over $54,097 plus 45c for every $1 over $180,000

with an extra 2 cents on top with the medicare levy.

So to put that in perspective an american man on 200k with a wife and kids at home is paying 32% plus state taxes (single or family).

An australian equivalent is at 47c

Also note that everyone pays tax on the first dollar, if you want to eliminate franking tax credits to retirees and whomever else, make the bottom tax rate 27.5 % or 30% wherever you want the corporate tax rate at and the bring the higher ones down so your not increasing your tax rate and then there is no more franking tax credit refunds.

Repeating myself, the bottom tax rates being so far below the corporate tax rate is the reason these refunds occur. Changing this would be fundamentally out of kilter with how income tax works. Obviously this policy doesnt effect me, but clearly in this country the biggest issue with out taxes is internationally, our highest tax rates are to high and are lowest tax free rate to large. Which creates to massive problems.

A massive effective tax rate for mothers and other people moving off benefits moving back into the work force - limiting their incentive.

A massive disincentive for productive effective people on higher tax rates to work harder.

That said, I freely concede that some european countries have even worse tax rates, some better some the same.

Keep in mind asia, our neighbours, the place where we belong all have far far lower tax rates.

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 42731
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by The Rickman » May 20, 2019, 10:15 am

T_R wrote:
May 20, 2019, 9:13 am
PigRickman wrote:
May 19, 2019, 9:09 pm
it'll have to be one hell of an orator to successfully sell that sort of message. Good luck waiting on that historical giant to appear.
Not really. Think about the GST. Hewson tried to implement it, but constantly stumbled. Remember him being asked to calculate the GST on a cake...? " Well, it depends if there's a sales tax on it now, or...or...if there's a sales tax on a component of it or how's it's iced..." or whatever it was. Bang, election gone.

Contrast to Howard a few years later, on the same 'gotcha' moment; "None. It's food. Next question?"

Unpopular (no one likes a new tax) policy, thoughtfully implemented but most of all, well explained.

It's possible, but wasn't for as limited a person as Shorten.

EDIT: Watch a man die, live on TV:

Haha, well that's all well and good, but it's got nothing on THIS...

Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 15666
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by T_R » May 20, 2019, 10:25 am

:D
Image

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.

User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 125355
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by greeneyed » May 20, 2019, 10:38 am

Actually, the answer was, everything is included. Which is the best form of any consumption tax. Food was only exempted after negotiations in the Senate to pass legislation.
Image

User avatar
The Rickman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 42731
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Favourite Player: Hodgo
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland

Re: The Politics Thread 2019

Post by The Rickman » May 20, 2019, 10:42 am

greeneyed wrote:
May 20, 2019, 10:38 am
Actually, the answer was, everything is included. Which is the best form of any consumption tax. Food was only exempted after negotiations in the Senate to pass legislation.
If it were up to me (and let's all hope that one day it is), raw food, such as fruit/vegetables, meat and pasta would be tax-free, yet everything that's pre-packaged or fast food would be taxed at the normal rate.
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush

Post Reply