Elaugaufein
Member
Excerpt:
Crikey said:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AusPoliGaf |Early 2016 Election| - the government's term has been... Shortened
- Thread starter Bernbaum
- Start date
- Status
New Essential Poll out, oh boy:
Level of immigration into Australia: Too high 50 About right 28 Too low 12
Increasing Australia's annual refugee intake from 13750 to 18750: Support 39 Oppose 44
How would you vote in a same-sex marriage plebiscite: Yes 58 (-2) No 28 (-2)
Federal 2 Party Preferred: L/NP 49 (+1) ALP 51 (-1)
Level of immigration into Australia: Too high 50 About right 28 Too low 12
Increasing Australia's annual refugee intake from 13750 to 18750: Support 39 Oppose 44
How would you vote in a same-sex marriage plebiscite: Yes 58 (-2) No 28 (-2)
Federal 2 Party Preferred: L/NP 49 (+1) ALP 51 (-1)
D.Lo
Member
That is another problem with them, yes.
But the context was how they are an example of a use of migration to drive down wages, which they definitely are in the contexts discussed.
It makes sense to me to import a senior executive if there are no suitable candidates locally, it's totally legit to have a way to do that. But construction workers? Really? What's next, 457s for factory and retail jobs?
Sure. Ideally most immigration restrictions would be relaxed. 457's drive up wages and employment on balance, just as teenagers entering the economy do.
There may be specific examples of 457's not working as intended, but this is at odds with the vast majority of them.
bobnowhere
Member
He is a right prat almost all the time.
IPA dimwit and complete suck on society wants to sell Blue Poles to pay off debt.
Funnily enough he has no problem spending 200mil on the plebiscite.
viciouskillersquirrel
Member
The same reason it might acquire any item of significant cultural heritage like say a sculpture or historical artifact.
I think calling that an item of significant culture heritage is really stretching it.
Elaugaufein
Member
It sort of doesn't. The National Gallery does.
And I hope you can see why theres a public institution dedicated to making art available to the public, as opposed to stashing it with collectors or being charged significant amounts to enter private collections. And competition is not particularly good at reducing prices in this area because copyright laws are fantastic at creating effective monopolies on particularly pieces by disallowing works that are too similar (go invisible hand of the
Also art by significant Australian artists is inherently of cultural relevance if not significance. Though the going price suggests that amongst collectors at least the artist is deemed significant in some way.
🙄🙄🙄🙄
A conservative politician wants to sell Blue Poles?
Probably thinks its the last remaining piece of public infrastructure.
Candescence
Member
And in another episode of NSW politics, Baird is apparently at least considering backflipping on the greyhound racing ban because the Nats are revolting and government backbenchers are freaking out about losing rural seats in 2019. This fucking state, I swear...
bobnowhere
Member
Fucking coward.
Shining Mike's lustre is gone. He probably won't even make the next election.
Elaugaufein
Member
The weird thing is even with the usual suspects actively against the ban it's still got over 60% support, so who knows if it'll even help in net. They might save some country seats by backflipping but lose more potential Labor / Greens seats. With support that broad its not likely to help in the Legislative Council either but I suspect that they've given up on trying to take a majority there already anyway.
Elaugaufein
Member
Making a new post to make this stand out
We're 4 months out from needing to renew our Crikely Subscription (I know this seems early but it was a little challenging to organize last time).
Please let me know if you're interested (if you're new) or not interested (if you've previously been involved). Costs will likely increase a bit this time since we won't qualify for the free member, since we're renewing rather than starting a subscription, but the exact amount will depend on the numbers.
We're 4 months out from needing to renew our Crikely Subscription (I know this seems early but it was a little challenging to organize last time).
Please let me know if you're interested (if you're new) or not interested (if you've previously been involved). Costs will likely increase a bit this time since we won't qualify for the free member, since we're renewing rather than starting a subscription, but the exact amount will depend on the numbers.
Aarglefarg
Member
Labor unanimously against the plebiscite, so it will be blocked in the Senate.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...eed-to-block-legislation-20161010-grzdkj.html
And:
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...eed-to-block-legislation-20161010-grzdkj.html
And:
Fucking coward is right. It was the one thing that I thought brought him even a tiny bit closer to someone like Daniel Andrews, and then he goes back on it. Absolute cunt who's clearly only in it for himself.
How much was it last time again (roughly)? I'd be in again, but it's harder to justify with a wedding coming up in about a month. But if you don't need the money until late Nov-early Dec, then I think I can swing it
Never a more appropriate time to use this:
Yeah, fuck that. That was the only thing the Liberals had going for them apart from actually getting public transport projects going.
Also fuck Luke Foley for taking up the cause of the industry.
You've got legitimate industries whose time may have passed come and gone, like the auto industry in Vic and SA and nobody's gone and defended them as vehemontly as the greyhound industry here. Those people had to find new jobs.
And then you've got this miserable lot who's made their living on the mistreatment and utter disregard of race dogs and other animals and they're allowed to carry on. Tough luck if it gets banned, find another job that's not steeped in animal cruelty.
It's amazing how such trivial things that will have a huge benefit to a lot of Australians and won't really make things any different for those against it is so important for those against it. There are so many more important things to deal with and threaten to withdraw support over. So amazingly feeble and petty.
D.Lo
Member
Yeah Luke Foley has acted like a piece of shit on this.
I mean really, of all the causes, an industry complicit in animal cruelty that has had 50 changes to clean itself up and failed every time - that's the one to run with.
How many seats would this get Labor anyway? Working class does not have to be about low-class horrible industries who only achieve harm.
Baird is a shit, but is just a trapped puppet like Turnbull here.
I mean really, of all the causes, an industry complicit in animal cruelty that has had 50 changes to clean itself up and failed every time - that's the one to run with.
How many seats would this get Labor anyway? Working class does not have to be about low-class horrible industries who only achieve harm.
Baird is a shit, but is just a trapped puppet like Turnbull here.
Legit just fucking legislate it. The LNP shouldn't give a shit about SSM. So frustrating watching actual national issues be swept aside by something that barely even ranks. Let gay people get married, have wild sex orgies, corrupt our kids with their agenda, w/e. And then get back to actually running the country.
At this point the LNP members not backing SSM are just hurting their larger cause for an 'issue' that was lost decades ago.
bobnowhere
Member
I don't buy into this whole suggestion that greyhounds resulted in the massive kicking Baird got at the council elections. First people tend to vote all over the place and secondly single issue independents are far more likely to get elected as the scale is much smaller and people are far more likely to vote on local issues, footpaths, bins, zoning, the amalgamations etc...
The greyhounds are just one of a number of Baird's stuff ups: Randwick light rail hurting not improving public transport, west connect and compulsory acquisitions, can't sell the poles and wires, council amalgamations, not knowing there are people outside of Sydney, fucking up health care, lockout laws etc...
The greyhounds are just one of a number of Baird's stuff ups: Randwick light rail hurting not improving public transport, west connect and compulsory acquisitions, can't sell the poles and wires, council amalgamations, not knowing there are people outside of Sydney, fucking up health care, lockout laws etc...
Dastardly Jerks
Banned
Never a more appropriate time to use this:
Perfect.
I was a bit surprised given Bairds public persona.
Elaugaufein
Member
ETA - PHON looks likely to support anti-Union bills on basis of freedom (already passed the CFA legislation). Someone needs to explain to me how targetting Unions for special scrutiny improves Freedom because by most metrics it's the opposite.
It will likely cost between $129 and $149 with $139 being most likely given similar interest to last year.
Money shouldn't be necessary until early December at the earliest. I'll pay up front and get the money back later, if we get to close to deadline , so I can leave the collection to late.
How much was it last time again (roughly)? I'd be in again, but it's harder to justify with a wedding coming up in about a month. But if you don't need the money until late Nov-early Dec, then I think I can swing it
It will likely cost between $129 and $149 with $139 being most likely given similar interest to last year.
Money shouldn't be necessary until early December at the earliest. I'll pay up front and get the money back later, if we get to close to deadline , so I can leave the collection to late.
I'll actually pay up this year. I had to make do without as I was pretty short on money.
Elaugaufein
Member
If anyone else is in this situation feel free to drop me a PM, and I'll try and work something out (be it a payment plan or a partially subsidized subscription if others are willing). We do get larger discounts for more people.
Awesome, and that timeframe should be perfect. I'm in!
While I'm a straight as an arrow but still support marriage equality - I'm actually OK with this. The amount of media saturation the right wing nutters would have done for an 'no' campaign (we all know they would have gone to town) would have been depressing and cringe worthy.
I think equality will happen, but not until the next Labor government.
Elaugaufein
Member
Seems probable, at least one Nat has already threatened to quit the Government if there's a free Vote , and they don't have the majority to risk it (I can think of at least 2 others who'd likely either go Independent or jump to PHON).
Dastardly Jerks
Banned
Read more at http://junkee.com/parliament-just-voted-cut-taxes-wealthiest-australians/87110#7kC5dlsGWk5oagHw.99
mmm yes, nice and good and lovely. love too encourage wealth inequality.
Keeping some people worse off so everyone can be worse off together isn't really a reason to be for taxes. And this is just indexing it to inflation so that people don't end up in a higher bracket through bracket creep. It's long-term policy so we solve problems before it actually occurs on a large scale.
Also income tax is a tax on income, not wealth. You can be asset rich and income poor, just as you can be income rich and asset poor. We should be taxing the first, not the second.
Finally, most taxpayers will have earnt more than 80K a year for a few years by the end of their productive lifetime.
Also the fact the Greens member said tax cuts don't do anything for the economy really explains how they went to the election on the platform they did.
Also income tax is a tax on income, not wealth. You can be asset rich and income poor, just as you can be income rich and asset poor. We should be taxing the first, not the second.
Finally, most taxpayers will have earnt more than 80K a year for a few years by the end of their productive lifetime.
Also the fact the Greens member said tax cuts don't do anything for the economy really explains how they went to the election on the platform they did.
Elaugaufein
Member
I suspect you're defining tax payer pretty narrowly there, the median income is $39 000. Bracket creep at the top end isn't effecting most of the population (these cuts are for approximately the top 20% of income earners). And there are excellent social reasons to avoid over concentration of wealth, like the way they have a disproportionate influence on our political system through media control, lobbying and networking. This isn't a thing you can wind back, just like the ability of capital to avoid things they don't like was intensified by globalisation and there's nothing a country can do about it even if they wanted to because capital flight will occur. It's a nice trick being able to ensure that political change can only ever move in the direction of your interests.
Rupert Murdoch demonstratably has more influence than I do and he's not even an Australian citizen, and I'm in the group that benefits from these cuts.
Dastardly Jerks
Banned
Not to mention men benefit more from it than women but hey.
bobnowhere
Member
Cause of SA Blackout (Essential):
Over reliance on Renewable Energy - 17%
Would have happened anyway - 60%
Chris Uhlmann is an Idiot (or Don't Know) - 24%
People have already stopped listening to Malcolm.
Over reliance on Renewable Energy - 17%
Would have happened anyway - 60%
Chris Uhlmann is an Idiot (or Don't Know) - 24%
People have already stopped listening to Malcolm.
Candescence
Member
So One Nation's Brian Burston wants the ABC to be defunded and replaced by a "Patriotic Broadcasting Corporation" instead.
Holy shit, that kind of name makes state-run media from China and Russia look subtle. I know hardcore right-wingers have a hard-on for fascism, but good grief, One Nation is composed of crazy people.
Holy shit, that kind of name makes state-run media from China and Russia look subtle. I know hardcore right-wingers have a hard-on for fascism, but good grief, One Nation is composed of crazy people.
Elaugaufein
Member
He wants it done because he thinks the ABC is biased against mainstream (read very conservative) Australians. The irony must be near tangible.
I do have to wonder how the hell you can think replacing an Australian broadcaster with a Patriotic broadcaster would make things less biased. One of these things is clearly less inclusive than the other. Unless he intends to broadcast in favour of all kinds of patriotism but given One Nations relationship with Multi-culturalism I suspect not.
Because women are on average worse off than men economically almost any change will be worse for women than men unless there's some correlation that tends to favour women embedded (childcare subsidies for example). Even high income tax rises likely benefit men more because women are far more concentrated at the bottom of the top bracket.
The wave of support for Labor will be huge when it happens, and the PM says "Today is a historic day, blah blah blah, we have brought about equality for all Australians, blah blah blah, and we did it without an expensive plebiscite and a media campaign that set to hurt our fellow Australians.'
bobnowhere
Member
.
Another 5% of the population would have entered the second to top tax bracket in the next few years, while in ten years time it'd be closer to 35% of the population. It's long-term policy.
I don't disagree. But we're talking income taxes, not wealth taxes here.
Also I'm less sympathetic to media control arguments now. Media is far less concentrated than it was even ten years ago. There are moderate left papers (Guardian, Crikey), far left (Independent, New Matilda), moderate right (The Australian), far-right (probably, I don't go searching for these). It's essentially demand driven, not supply as it used to be.
Elaugaufein
Member
I agree with you online, the physical media is still very much a Murdoch game, though it's far less effective than it once was in shaping opinion. The demographics mean it's still significant in regional areas (and so Queensland, etc). Far right online publications exist, yes. If you're a centrist who thinks the Greens are ridiculous I'm not sure what you'd make them, their economics are heavily protectionist (also BUY GOLD) and they usually want to return to a gold standard (which I think we both agree would be horrendous), and their social and political stuff is comes from an alternative timeline. It's worse than the stuff you get from SAlt, where America is the great Satan, at least it's actually true that America isn't the moral paragon it likes to make out. These people seem to think illegal immigrants get to vote, and Muslims make up 20%+ of the population.
I'm sure their are saner far right publications similar to the Independent and Newatilda but I haven't seen many. I suspect that News Corps regional adjustment of how Right wing (eg the Daily Telegraph) they are eliminates a lot of the market.
Seems to be a similar situation in the US where the Drudge Report seems to be the next notable thing to the Right of Fox (I'm not convinced Breitbart has a personal relationship with reality whereas Drudge at least occasionally checks in).
I guess the other thing is that a lot of that demographic still favours physical papers and TV so you're moving into the alt-right by the time you hit a large enough web comfortable market.
bobnowhere
Member
So they've stuffed it up again.
Turnbull government accidentally supports Labor in second embarrassing parliamentary Blunder
Pyne has some 'splaining to do even though it looks like Kelly O'Dwyer was the main culprit.
Edit: So it looks like the government forgot to vote no on a 2nd reading on how the government has been terrible in regards to tackling multi-national tax avoidance and the parliament just passed a unanimous resolution that they are.
Turnbull government accidentally supports Labor in second embarrassing parliamentary Blunder
Pyne has some 'splaining to do even though it looks like Kelly O'Dwyer was the main culprit.
Edit: So it looks like the government forgot to vote no on a 2nd reading on how the government has been terrible in regards to tackling multi-national tax avoidance and the parliament just passed a unanimous resolution that they are.
So they've stuffed it up again.
Turnbull government accidentally supports Labor in second embarrassing parliamentary Blunder
Pyne has some 'splaining to do even though it looks like Kelly O'Dwyer was the main culprit.
Edit: So it looks like the government forgot to vote no on a 2nd reading on how the government has been terrible in regards to tackling multi-national tax avoidance and the parliament just passed a unanimous resolution that they are.
Oopsie daisy
Elaugaufein
Member
So they've stuffed it up again.
Turnbull government accidentally supports Labor in second embarrassing parliamentary Blunder
Pyne has some 'splaining to do even though it looks like Kelly O'Dwyer was the main culprit.
Edit: So it looks like the government forgot to vote no on a 2nd reading on how the government has been terrible in regards to tackling multi-national tax avoidance and the parliament just passed a unanimous resolution that they are.
Did they get this through the Senate as well ? Because that would be pretty funny.
- Status