The Politics Thread 2024

[The Nickman]

You keep missing very basic and direct questions, Dubs.
You've got a lot time to talk about the topic why cant you answer simple questions?

1. If you had to guess, what do you think Australia Day on January 26th has been about for our first nations people?
2. What it is about a BBQ, beer and cricket that needs to be done specifically on January 26th and not another date?

He won't answer because it's a slippery slope. We all know where it leads.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

He’s already spouting off his typical garbage, how worse can it get?

Anyone vehemently insisting that Oz day must remain on January 26 is most likely an ****.

No one is saying that you can’t or shouldn’t have a public holiday. No one is saying you shouldn’t be proud of and celebrate living in one of the best countries in the world. No one is even saying you cant find the remaining outlets who haven’t discontinued their cheap Chinese flags and purchase all their stock to demonstrate how patriotic you are.

Most people are just calling for a national day that doesn’t actively offend and is not hurtful to a significant number of Australians.

And for those more nationalistic folk inclined to drape themselves in the flag, wouldn’t it be better to have a date that is not maligned every year, where you can crack on with the BBQs and beers without the pall over it evert time the date rolls around?

I see no downside to changing the date and I suspect most who are still clinging to it are one or a combination of racist, mean spirited or stupid.

Or all three, in the case of our resident Admin.

[The Nickman]

You keep missing very basic and direct questions, Dubs.
You've got a lot time to talk about the topic why cant you answer simple questions?

1. If you had to guess, what do you think Australia Day on January 26th has been about for our first nations people?
2. What it is about a BBQ, beer and cricket that needs to be done specifically on January 26th and not another date?

Jan 26 is a historical event. If you need explaining why it's significant to our nation, then your second question is moot.

Why wont you answer very simple questions?
I honestly think you're afraid to earnestly answer those questions because it will expose that on question one, you fully understand the pain the date causes for our Indigenous Australians. And on question two, it changes nothing for you. You're objecting out of spite and nothing more. Spite for Indigenous Australians.

Which is quite a statement, and an unsurprising one, about your character and what you stand for.

I think you're being very broad and over generalised in your first question.

I'm not arrogant enough to answer for that entire genre. I just can't.

Yet you assume it was the worst thing that ever happened to them?

If not for British settlement, the French would have taken it.

Here's a heads up. World migration and exploration has been going on forever. Every continent, most countries, have had other people come and either settle or invade.

Frankly, the settlement of Australia was quiet peaceful.

Yes, some atrocities occurred. Changing the date won't fix anything.

And I guarantee you they came from somewhere else. They just didn't spring up out of the ground.

Our government offers them many benefits and services in attempt to serve and help.

As i said, and you've ignored, they were not a united nation, they were a series of warring tribes fighting over land, food, women and dying young.

British settlement has absolutely enhanced their lives. For goodness sake Nick, they didn't use the wheel.

Feel sorry all you want.

I'm not doing it out of spite, and i absolutely detest you for saying it.

Up until now you'd engaged far more respectful than others.

But as usual, name calling and ad hominem comments make your argument more persuasive.

You're a genuinely horrible person. I hope some day you wake up to yourself, but I highly doubt it.

[The Nickman]

You are smart enough to know why the January 26th date is one that causes mixed feelings at best and great pain at worst to many indigenous Australians. And non Indigenous Australians too (as this thread shows).

You know full well what that day means to you, by your own words - a BBQ, beer and a game of cricket, can be had on ANY DAY of the year and it would not impact your enjoyment of those activities. It would not change or impact your life what so ever if Australia day was held on Jan 19 or March 27 or any date.

And yet you hold firm on needing this event to be held on 26th and have offered only that it's a significant date in history as reasoning for that position.

January 26th is indeed a significant historical date, but there are a very many other historical dates that batter align with what Australia is, what is stands for as a nation and as a people and why it is such a great country. As has been pointed out and you just dimiss them with little care or consideration. Not interested at all.

Detest me all you like for holding you to account, but you have given me other conclusion i can reach, provided me no alternative motivation for your insistance on a January 26th date. And in fact that post above only strengthens my position... your entire post there is coded (and in some cases not so coded!) language to basically say Indigenous Australians were uncivilised savages that were damn lucky to be subjugated and dispossessed by Great Britain.
Im more than happy to believe the best in people but you've given me no reason in this discussion or previous ones to believe your position is rooted in anything but as Mickey put it - "a combination of racist, mean spirited or stupid."

And FWIW i dont think you're stupid.

As the late, great Meatloaf once said… two out of three ain’t bad

[gerg]

It's sadly ironic that the same group of people will fiercely and vocally insist that they should not be held accountable for the sins of our forebears but that same group are the ones holding their ground on not changing the date.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

[Sid]

It's the date the great Naval Explorer Captain Cook planted his anchor in the bay, I love the fact he did.

Sent from my SM-A536E using Tapatalk

I find it amusing how many people with strong opinions of Jan 26 don’t know what happened that day

[Off]

Cook line and sinker.

Sent from my SM-A536E using Tapatalk

[gangrenous]

Cook line and sinker.

Sent from my SM-A536E using Tapatalk

Cook lie from stinker?

[gangrenous]

I know some people are precious about freedom of speech purity here. But a banning sure would make this place more pleasant.

[Dr Zaius]

You're swimming against the tide on this one Dubby. The Winds of Change are howling and at some point, the date will change. Then like same sex marriage, a few years on most people will look back and wonder why we hadn't done it sooner. Except a few bitter people.

[Botman]

Indeed. The tide is going heavily against those views and mercifully so.

What i find is interesting is ive seen studies that suggest people arent turning conservative in their old age as was once the case... it used to be that as people aged they got more conserative and that sort of contruct has been an underpinning of conservative politics... left get the young, right get the old... but if that's no longer the case to the extent it once was, i wonder where does conservative politics sit in 30 years time?

[The Nickman]

Anybody see the recent David McWilliams podcast on the rise of Robert F Kennedy? Super interesting stuff here and could chuck a real spanner in the 2024 US Elections.

Apologies if this has been brought up already and it's just hidden amongst the mountains and mountains of typical dubby garbage that now pollute the page once again.

[papabear]

You keep missing very basic and direct questions, Dubs.
You've got a lot time to talk about the topic why cant you answer simple questions?

1. If you had to guess, what do you think Australia Day on January 26th has been about for our first nations people?
2. What it is about a BBQ, beer and cricket that needs to be done specifically on January 26th and not another date?

Jan 26 is a historical event. If you need explaining why it's significant to our nation, then your second question is moot.

There are a lot of dates significant to our nation:-
22 august - cook claiming the land for the motherland.
1 January - federation
31 July WA the final colony to join australia votes in favor of joining the federation.

I also feel like putting my birthday up for **** and giggles.

You could go on and on and on..

The modern reality of australia day is when the work year / school year really gets going again. The department of education should pull their finger out of their **** and get all unis and schools started again by this date and the pm should pick a date in mid to late january.

If you can't see the advantage of giving up philip landing in the best city in australia and the best place to start a settlement in australia (yes he sailed on down past QLD) too avoid celebrating on a painful day of such a proportion of the population then I dont think any argument is going to persuade you but eventually you will see it done, because soon enough a politician will be strong enough to do it.

Hopefully Albo does but he wasted some of his progressive capital on his ill thought out yes vote.







ftr QLD was ostensibly part of NSW at that point in history.

[papabear]

Indeed. The tide is going heavily against those views and mercifully so.

What i find is interesting is ive seen studies that suggest people arent turning conservative in their old age as was once the case... it used to be that as people aged they got more conservative and that sort of contruct has been an underpinning of conservative politics... left get the young, right get the old... but if that's no longer the case to the extent it once was, i wonder where does conservative politics sit in 30 years time?

It is interesting.

On the financial side, the more money you accumulate you should naturally want to retain and not hand it back to the govt to give it to someone who hasnt earned it.

On the social issues side. I have long considered myself pretty pro progressive live and let live. Let people do in their bedrooms what entertains them.

That said, I am not huge on a trans woman who has gone through puberty competing in womans sport. Nor am I huge on the idea of people competing in some sort of body shape handicap style with biological sex not counting type of sporting regime. I think these sorts of agendas are pretty poor form when it comes to wanting to see women compete on a fair playing field.

[Mickey_Raider]

Indeed. The tide is going heavily against those views and mercifully so.

What i find is interesting is ive seen studies that suggest people arent turning conservative in their old age as was once the case... it used to be that as people aged they got more conserative and that sort of contruct has been an underpinning of conservative politics... left get the young, right get the old... but if that's no longer the case to the extent it once was, i wonder where does conservative politics sit in 30 years time?

The great crystallising fault line in politics in this country and even on a wider global scale is home ownership.

Liberal strategist Tony Barry put it succinctly when he said something to the effect that in order to create conservatives people need to have something to conserve.

While the deck is stacked so heavily against younger people and the bulk of generous tax concessions lay on the established capital/asset side of the ledger, why on earth would young people queue up to vote for side of politics whose interests are quite clearly in preserving as much as the status quo as possible? And a status quo that is quite clearly broken for whole generations and large swathes of Australians.

That is why the Greens are making such massive strides in inner cities. However arguably unrealistic or idealistic some of their ideas may be, they appeal to a whole generation of renters who have real lived experience of property and even rental prices just being pushed further and further out of their grasp. Whilst they are being told by crony capitalists and out of touch boomers just to stop going out for smashed avos.

The report that came out the other day which said that Sydney is going to be a generation without grandchildren is really not as hyperbolic as it seems. Even people on very good incomes are being forced out of Sydney.

If I was a strategist for the Tories my number one action item with a bullet would be creating a housing policy which actually addresses housing affordability. And one which doesn't just pour more fuel on the demand fire like their "raid your super" policy.

[The Nickman]

That's a very good point you raise, Mickey. In fact a close friend of mine who knows his **** told me it's indeed a very good time to get out of Sydney.

[zim]

Anybody see the recent David McWilliams podcast on the rise of Robert F Kennedy? Super interesting stuff here and could chuck a real spanner in the 2024 US Elections.

Apologies if this has been brought up already and it's just hidden amongst the mountains and mountains of typical dubby garbage that now pollute the page once again.

Seemed like a good advertisement from a guest that is clearly wanting to be on his staff for his run in 2028. Lots of positive conclusions on donation and support information that is also apparently unknown, but at least his known views on women's health and minor drug offenses are better than the Republican norm.
Anything more moderate on that side of the fence would be better than the current Trumpism and disingenuous negotiating.

[The Nickman]

Anybody see the recent David McWilliams podcast on the rise of Robert F Kennedy? Super interesting stuff here and could chuck a real spanner in the 2024 US Elections.

Apologies if this has been brought up already and it's just hidden amongst the mountains and mountains of typical dubby garbage that now pollute the page once again.

Seemed like a good advertisement from a guest that is clearly wanting to be on his staff for his run in 2028. Lots of positive conclusions on donation and support information that is also apparently unknown, but at least his known views on women's health and minor drug offenses are better than the Republican norm.
Anything more moderate on that side of the fence would be better than the current Trumpism and disingenuous negotiating.

What I've found most interesting is that nobody's saying he can win (although stranger things have happened with GW Bush, Trump and even Obama), however if he can get enough electoral college votes to prevent both Trump and Biden winning then we could have complete chaos.

[zim]

Yeah that would be one of those "moments of history". Very interesting indeed.

[papabear]

Indeed. The tide is going heavily against those views and mercifully so.

What i find is interesting is ive seen studies that suggest people arent turning conservative in their old age as was once the case... it used to be that as people aged they got more conserative and that sort of contruct has been an underpinning of conservative politics... left get the young, right get the old... but if that's no longer the case to the extent it once was, i wonder where does conservative politics sit in 30 years time?

The great crystallising fault line in politics in this country and even on a wider global scale is home ownership.

Liberal strategist Tony Barry put it succinctly when he said something to the effect that in order to create conservatives people need to have something to conserve.

While the deck is stacked so heavily against younger people and the bulk of generous tax concessions lay on the established capital/asset side of the ledger, why on earth would young people queue up to vote for side of politics whose interests are quite clearly in preserving as much as the status quo as possible? And a status quo that is quite clearly broken for whole generations and large swathes of Australians.

That is why the Greens are making such massive strides in inner cities. However arguably unrealistic or idealistic some of their ideas may be, they appeal to a whole generation of renters who have real lived experience of property and even rental prices just being pushed further and further out of their grasp. Whilst they are being told by crony capitalists and out of touch boomers just to stop going out for smashed avos.

The report that came out the other day which said that Sydney is going to be a generation without grandchildren is really not as hyperbolic as it seems. Even people on very good incomes are being forced out of Sydney.

If I was a strategist for the Tories my number one action item with a bullet would be creating a housing policy which actually addresses housing affordability. And one which doesn't just pour more fuel on the demand fire like their "raid your super" policy.

Currently the Labor party have NSW and Australia, with the Greens holding the balance of power in the senate.

Shouldn't young people be laughing with the greens / labor having so much power and the coalition having none.

The main thing we should all be collectively trying to conserve and live within most efficiently is the environment. Thus, that should make conservatives out of us all, however, the party you are championing cares so much more about income redistribution then the environment they win votes out of budding young communists as opposed to the old greeny of yesteryear.

But I agree that housing should be a policy for a government in charge I would like at:-
- removing CGT in its entirety - this way companies can effectively buy property and interest can be tax appropriately.
- remove interest deductions that go beyond the income earned on the property from personal income (negative gearing)
- remove planning controls from local governments all together
- remove stamp duty on all domestic purchases.
- include permanent residents with the foreign resident stamp duty surcharge and increase it to 15%. Really if you want to buy an australian property become an australian citizen, if the market plummets you can always adjust this pretty easily.
- rejig immigration so its not just a tertiary education situation and trades people or people studying trades can obtain citizenship here too.
- spend some money on building some public housing.

But why should it be the coalition who are solely responsible for looking at housing? shouldnt the labor party and the greens also look into it.

How would I pay for the above.
- Can the NDIS - shift people on to the appropriate DSP - just cut the dodgy supply services industry out of the trough.
- Can the family tax benefit a and b

you will come out way ahead.

[Mickey_Raider]

Indeed. The tide is going heavily against those views and mercifully so.

What i find is interesting is ive seen studies that suggest people arent turning conservative in their old age as was once the case... it used to be that as people aged they got more conserative and that sort of contruct has been an underpinning of conservative politics... left get the young, right get the old... but if that's no longer the case to the extent it once was, i wonder where does conservative politics sit in 30 years time?

The great crystallising fault line in politics in this country and even on a wider global scale is home ownership.

Liberal strategist Tony Barry put it succinctly when he said something to the effect that in order to create conservatives people need to have something to conserve.

While the deck is stacked so heavily against younger people and the bulk of generous tax concessions lay on the established capital/asset side of the ledger, why on earth would young people queue up to vote for side of politics whose interests are quite clearly in preserving as much as the status quo as possible? And a status quo that is quite clearly broken for whole generations and large swathes of Australians.

That is why the Greens are making such massive strides in inner cities. However arguably unrealistic or idealistic some of their ideas may be, they appeal to a whole generation of renters who have real lived experience of property and even rental prices just being pushed further and further out of their grasp. Whilst they are being told by crony capitalists and out of touch boomers just to stop going out for smashed avos.

The report that came out the other day which said that Sydney is going to be a generation without grandchildren is really not as hyperbolic as it seems. Even people on very good incomes are being forced out of Sydney.

If I was a strategist for the Tories my number one action item with a bullet would be creating a housing policy which actually addresses housing affordability. And one which doesn't just pour more fuel on the demand fire like their "raid your super" policy.

Currently the Labor party have NSW and Australia, with the Greens holding the balance of power in the senate.

Shouldn't young people be laughing with the greens / labor having so much power and the coalition having none.

The main thing we should all be collectively trying to conserve and live within most efficiently is the environment. Thus, that should make conservatives out of us all, however, the party you are championing cares so much more about income redistribution then the environment they win votes out of budding young communists as opposed to the old greeny of yesteryear.

But I agree that housing should be a policy for a government in charge I would like at:-
- removing CGT in its entirety - this way companies can effectively buy property and interest can be tax appropriately.
- remove interest deductions that go beyond the income earned on the property from personal income (negative gearing)
- remove planning controls from local governments all together
- remove stamp duty on all domestic purchases.
- include permanent residents with the foreign resident stamp duty surcharge and increase it to 15%. Really if you want to buy an australian property become an australian citizen, if the market plummets you can always adjust this pretty easily.
- rejig immigration so its not just a tertiary education situation and trades people or people studying trades can obtain citizenship here too.
- spend some money on building some public housing.

But why should it be the coalition who are solely responsible for looking at housing? shouldnt the labor party and the greens also look into it.

How would I pay for the above.
- Can the NDIS - shift people on to the appropriate DSP - just cut the dodgy supply services industry out of the trough.
- Can the family tax benefit a and b

you will come out way ahead.

On the first bolded point. Steady on there papa. I am by no means championing the Greens. I am making the mere observation that the party are making huge gains across younger demographics and amongst renters. It was kind of implied in my post that I consider some of of their ideas are grounded in idealism rather than realism, which I don't think they mind because I think they are more interested in sending a strong signal to a broad demographic (ie renters) that they are fighting for them.

On the second bolded point. I am not sure how you extrapolated that from my post. Botman was making a general point about the challenges of conservatism at the moment and I was making the point that if I was being paid and charged with engineering the LNP comeback, I would be squarely focusing on housing policy.

As to the specifics and mechanics about how to craft such a policy from within the values framework of conservatism, I have no idea. But making raids on super won't cut it. In fact it will likely make it worse.

On your proposed housing reforms, some eminently sensible suggestions there and some real policy meat to get stuck into there. Unfortunately I think 2019 scuppered any immediate prospects for legitimate housing reform. There may come a point in the future where a tipping point is reached where it is unavoidable though.

[gangrenous]

As to the specifics and mechanics about how to craft such a policy from within the values framework of conservatism, I have no idea. But making raids on super won't cut it. In fact it will likely make it worse.

I don’t believe it can.

How anyone thinks values of “keeping things the same” can be appropriate for the period of explosive rapid technological development is beyond me. We’re facing huge issues of climate change and wealth concentration which will be exacerbated by AI.

These issues among others are not addressed by “this has worked for us, let’s keep doing what we’ve always done”.

[Dr Zaius]

Anybody see the recent David McWilliams podcast on the rise of Robert F Kennedy? Super interesting stuff here and could chuck a real spanner in the 2024 US Elections.

Apologies if this has been brought up already and it's just hidden amongst the mountains and mountains of typical dubby garbage that now pollute the page once again.

I thought that it was pretty disappointing actually. They downplayed his anti vax rhetoric as "doesn't support compulsory covid vaccines".

In reality he was held up as hero of the antivax community long before covid. He propagates all sorts of discredited Bull. Really a cursory google search brings up what a **** this guy is.

[The Nickman]

Anybody see the recent David McWilliams podcast on the rise of Robert F Kennedy? Super interesting stuff here and could chuck a real spanner in the 2024 US Elections.

Apologies if this has been brought up already and it's just hidden amongst the mountains and mountains of typical dubby garbage that now pollute the page once again.

I thought that it was pretty disappointing actually. They downplayed his anti vax rhetoric as "doesn't support compulsory covid vaccines".

In reality he was held up as hero of the antivax community long before covid. He propagates all sorts of discredited Bull. Really a cursory google search brings up what a piece of **** this guy is.

Interesting. I knew nothing about him before the podcast, and certainly didn't know he was an anti-vaxxer.

I still think the fact he could completely stuff the electoral college process could be a fascinating watch.

[Dr Zaius]

Anybody see the recent David McWilliams podcast on the rise of Robert F Kennedy? Super interesting stuff here and could chuck a real spanner in the 2024 US Elections.

Apologies if this has been brought up already and it's just hidden amongst the mountains and mountains of typical dubby garbage that now pollute the page once again.

I thought that it was pretty disappointing actually. They downplayed his anti vax rhetoric as "doesn't support compulsory covid vaccines".

In reality he was held up as hero of the antivax community long before covid. He propagates all sorts of discredited Bull. Really a cursory google search brings up what a piece of **** this guy is.

Interesting. I knew nothing about him before the podcast, and certainly didn't know he was an anti-vaxxer.

I still think the fact he could completely stuff the electoral college process could be a fascinating watch.

His success in any area, including the election polls, is on the basis of his name. The reality is that the Kennedy Family have all but disowned him. The reality is that he is a dishonest conspiracy theorist.

So in regards to the postcast, it starts with the guest either deliberately misleading the audience with her answer to the first question (about him being an antivaxxer), or she has shown that she is incredibly poor at research. Either way, it's difficult to take any of her views on RFKJ without a grain of salt after that. I found it very disappointing.

But yes agreed, it is interesting.

The Kennedys really don’t like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Maybe they’re onto something: https://slate.com/human-interest/2023/0 ... amily.html

[gangrenous]

Back on housing, this “Help to buy” scheme is as dumb as every other policy that supposedly helps the younger generation afford housing.

A handful of select people get additional funding to jack up prices and give them lower equity. Brilliant.

The solutions that work are all too hard - reducing investor incentives, building new houses, reducing immigration, increasing standard of living in regional cities with jobs/facilities.

[The Nickman]

Anybody see the recent David McWilliams podcast on the rise of Robert F Kennedy? Super interesting stuff here and could chuck a real spanner in the 2024 US Elections.

Apologies if this has been brought up already and it's just hidden amongst the mountains and mountains of typical dubby garbage that now pollute the page once again.

I thought that it was pretty disappointing actually. They downplayed his anti vax rhetoric as "doesn't support compulsory covid vaccines".

In reality he was held up as hero of the antivax community long before covid. He propagates all sorts of discredited Bull. Really a cursory google search brings up what a piece of **** this guy is.

Interesting. I knew nothing about him before the podcast, and certainly didn't know he was an anti-vaxxer.

I still think the fact he could completely stuff the electoral college process could be a fascinating watch.

His success in any area, including the election polls, is on the basis of his name. The reality is that the Kennedy Family have all but disowned him. The reality is that he is a dishonest conspiracy theorist.

So in regards to the postcast, it starts with the guest either deliberately misleading the audience with her answer to the first question (about him being an antivaxxer), or she has shown that she is incredibly poor at research. Either way, it's difficult to take any of her views on RFKJ without a grain of salt after that. I found it very disappointing.

But yes agreed, it is interesting.

The Kennedys really don’t like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Maybe they’re onto something: https://slate.com/human-interest/2023/0 ... amily.html

That's a good read. Certainly a bit different to what Pippa Malmgren was saying.

[The Nickman]

Back on housing, this “Help to buy” scheme is as dumb as every other policy that supposedly helps the younger generation afford housing.

A handful of select people get additional funding to jack up prices and give them lower equity. Brilliant.

The solutions that work are all too hard - reducing investor incentives, building new houses, reducing immigration, increasing standard of living in regional cities with jobs/facilities.

Honestly, out of all of those suggestions, building new houses is the best one.

[Dr Zaius]

Anybody see the recent David McWilliams podcast on the rise of Robert F Kennedy? Super interesting stuff here and could chuck a real spanner in the 2024 US Elections.

Apologies if this has been brought up already and it's just hidden amongst the mountains and mountains of typical dubby garbage that now pollute the page once again.

I thought that it was pretty disappointing actually. They downplayed his anti vax rhetoric as "doesn't support compulsory covid vaccines".

In reality he was held up as hero of the antivax community long before covid. He propagates all sorts of discredited Bull. Really a cursory google search brings up what a piece of **** this guy is.

Interesting. I knew nothing about him before the podcast, and certainly didn't know he was an anti-vaxxer.

I still think the fact he could completely stuff the electoral college process could be a fascinating watch.

His success in any area, including the election polls, is on the basis of his name. The reality is that the Kennedy Family have all but disowned him. The reality is that he is a dishonest conspiracy theorist.

So in regards to the postcast, it starts with the guest either deliberately misleading the audience with her answer to the first question (about him being an antivaxxer), or she has shown that she is incredibly poor at research. Either way, it's difficult to take any of her views on RFKJ without a grain of salt after that. I found it very disappointing.

But yes agreed, it is interesting.

The Kennedys really don’t like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Maybe they’re onto something: https://slate.com/human-interest/2023/0 ... amily.html

That's a good read. Certainly a bit different to what Pippa Malmgren was saying.

Indeed. As I said, disappointing.

[The Nickman]

I mean, she was an advisor to George W Bush, who, in my opinion, was the worst and most dangerous president I’d seen before Trump came along.

[Dr Zaius]

I mean, she was an advisor to George W Bush, who, in my opinion, was the worst and most dangerous president I’d seen before Trump came along.

Poor old Dubya just wasn't very bright.

I still remember that footage of him in the preschool on 9/11, when his minder came up and whispered in his ear. Was he confused because of the unfolding events in NYC, or because he couldn't follow the plot in the story book that he was reading?

[Botman]

NSW Police Commissioner's interview on Sunrise in response to an officer stalking and murdering two people with his service issued weapon was about as bad as you can get.
Worth tracking down and listening to it if you've got a spare 10 minutes

My respect and trust for Police in this country continues to dwindle.

[papabear]

Indeed. The tide is going heavily against those views and mercifully so.

What i find is interesting is ive seen studies that suggest people arent turning conservative in their old age as was once the case... it used to be that as people aged they got more conserative and that sort of contruct has been an underpinning of conservative politics... left get the young, right get the old... but if that's no longer the case to the extent it once was, i wonder where does conservative politics sit in 30 years time?

The great crystallising fault line in politics in this country and even on a wider global scale is home ownership.

Liberal strategist Tony Barry put it succinctly when he said something to the effect that in order to create conservatives people need to have something to conserve.

While the deck is stacked so heavily against younger people and the bulk of generous tax concessions lay on the established capital/asset side of the ledger, why on earth would young people queue up to vote for side of politics whose interests are quite clearly in preserving as much as the status quo as possible? And a status quo that is quite clearly broken for whole generations and large swathes of Australians.

That is why the Greens are making such massive strides in inner cities. However arguably unrealistic or idealistic some of their ideas may be, they appeal to a whole generation of renters who have real lived experience of property and even rental prices just being pushed further and further out of their grasp. Whilst they are being told by crony capitalists and out of touch boomers just to stop going out for smashed avos.

The report that came out the other day which said that Sydney is going to be a generation without grandchildren is really not as hyperbolic as it seems. Even people on very good incomes are being forced out of Sydney.

If I was a strategist for the Tories my number one action item with a bullet would be creating a housing policy which actually addresses housing affordability. And one which doesn't just pour more fuel on the demand fire like their "raid your super" policy.

Currently the Labor party have NSW and Australia, with the Greens holding the balance of power in the senate.

Shouldn't young people be laughing with the greens / labor having so much power and the coalition having none.

The main thing we should all be collectively trying to conserve and live within most efficiently is the environment. Thus, that should make conservatives out of us all, however, the party you are championing cares so much more about income redistribution then the environment they win votes out of budding young communists as opposed to the old greeny of yesteryear.

But I agree that housing should be a policy for a government in charge I would like at:-
- removing CGT in its entirety - this way companies can effectively buy property and interest can be tax appropriately.
- remove interest deductions that go beyond the income earned on the property from personal income (negative gearing)
- remove planning controls from local governments all together
- remove stamp duty on all domestic purchases.
- include permanent residents with the foreign resident stamp duty surcharge and increase it to 15%. Really if you want to buy an australian property become an australian citizen, if the market plummets you can always adjust this pretty easily.
- rejig immigration so its not just a tertiary education situation and trades people or people studying trades can obtain citizenship here too.
- spend some money on building some public housing.

But why should it be the coalition who are solely responsible for looking at housing? shouldnt the labor party and the greens also look into it.

How would I pay for the above.
- Can the NDIS - shift people on to the appropriate DSP - just cut the dodgy supply services industry out of the trough.
- Can the family tax benefit a and b

you will come out way ahead.

On the first bolded point. Steady on there papa. I am by no means championing the Greens. I am making the mere observation that the party are making huge gains across younger demographics and amongst renters. It was kind of implied in my post that I consider some of of their ideas are grounded in idealism rather than realism, which I don't think they mind because I think they are more interested in sending a strong signal to a broad demographic (ie renters) that they are fighting for them.

On the second bolded point. I am not sure how you extrapolated that from my post. Botman was making a general point about the challenges of conservatism at the moment and I was making the point that if I was being paid and charged with engineering the LNP comeback, I would be squarely focusing on housing policy.

As to the specifics and mechanics about how to craft such a policy from within the values framework of conservatism, I have no idea. But making raids on super won't cut it. In fact it will likely make it worse.

On your proposed housing reforms, some eminently sensible suggestions there and some real policy meat to get stuck into there. Unfortunately I think 2019 scuppered any immediate prospects for legitimate housing reform. There may come a point in the future where a tipping point is reached where it is unavoidable though.

I think if either party tries to run the country out of the principles of consevatism / progressivism (or pick an over encompassing buzzword) they are going to be booted pretty quick.

They should be just looking at what is both fair and effective.

[gangrenous]

Back on housing, this “Help to buy” scheme is as dumb as every other policy that supposedly helps the younger generation afford housing.

A handful of select people get additional funding to jack up prices and give them lower equity. Brilliant.

The solutions that work are all too hard - reducing investor incentives, building new houses, reducing immigration, increasing standard of living in regional cities with jobs/facilities.

Honestly, out of all of those suggestions, building new houses is the best one.

I’m not sure it makes sense to call one “best”.

Reducing immigration is the only one I’d consider undesirable. The other three should all be done, with building homes having significant lag and regional development even moreso.

[Finchy]

This will have an interesting flow on effect I would imagine:

Vaccine mandates ruled unlawful by Supreme Court.

https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/at ... c62ac46fda

[The Nickman]

This will have an interesting flow on effect I would imagine:

Vaccine mandates ruled unlawful by Supreme Court.

https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/at ... c62ac46fda

Agreed. Every conspiracy theorist I know is in complete and total meltdown right now, it's a sight to behold.