That's pretty interesting, thanks.
-
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 |OT| Boats? What Boats?
- Thread starter Bernbaum
- Start date
- Status
That's pretty interesting, thanks.
Sure, but not in the realm of middle class welfare.
Elaugaufein
Member
$59576.40 as of last year (trend was ~$5.20 lower). That's skewed a bit high since it's only for people deemed employees , so actual median income is lower (since the number of people with 0 or taxed benefits income (which are usually based on delusional costs of living of around $26000 per adult per annum) are much larger than the independently wealthy).
W was a fascinating case given an immense amount of his spending was a war he kept almost entirely off budget (so Obama often gets blamed for the huge surge in debt that putting it back on book cost).
bobnowhere
Member
Seems a little higher than the number I read a while back, but as you say that one might have included those on $0 taxable income and those liberated to pursue other opportunities.
Mouth agape level cartoon from Cath Wilcox. Every bit as good as Pope's in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo shootings.
Elaugaufein
Member
The latest I can find for general "income" rather than wages is $81000 / household from 13-14.
_
I can't find information about adults / household. I get 2.6 persons which almost definitely includes dependent children. So not sure how that breaks down per adult. I'd expect it to be around ~50 k.
It is kind of funny in a blackly humourous surrealist way. Like a genie granting someone's wish to be safe from all harm by sealing them in a leas box deep underground.
D.Lo
Member
I wonder how it makes most people feel when they misunderstand 'average taxable income' is 80k. Even separate from the fact that taxable income is lowered for many rich with various schemes (negative gearing property is just one), plus family trusts etc, using yours/spouse's super funds to reduce taxable income while still spending it etc.
I mean, 80% of full time workers are on less than 80k. I'd assume basically all part time workers are on less than 80k.
How does it feel when you're at the peak of your career as office manager/shift supervisor/whatever and you hear that the 'average person' is on 1.5x you?
Having worked with lots of employment data, I've seen the job market is a total mess of distribution anyway. People working for government of all levels are paid far more than their equivalent non-government (some council receptionists will be on 80k), and in my experience they have no idea it's abnormally high pay for what they do.
Then so many people work below minimum wage and have no idea it's illegal. Bosses look up 'minimum wage' and pay that (or an out of date version of it), but that's the full time rate, casual needs to be 25%+ more. And in many industries the awards call for higher than national minimum wages, so even NMW for full time is illegal. We just simply do not enforce our laws, unless Four Corners notices.
I mean, 80% of full time workers are on less than 80k. I'd assume basically all part time workers are on less than 80k.
How does it feel when you're at the peak of your career as office manager/shift supervisor/whatever and you hear that the 'average person' is on 1.5x you?
Having worked with lots of employment data, I've seen the job market is a total mess of distribution anyway. People working for government of all levels are paid far more than their equivalent non-government (some council receptionists will be on 80k), and in my experience they have no idea it's abnormally high pay for what they do.
Then so many people work below minimum wage and have no idea it's illegal. Bosses look up 'minimum wage' and pay that (or an out of date version of it), but that's the full time rate, casual needs to be 25%+ more. And in many industries the awards call for higher than national minimum wages, so even NMW for full time is illegal. We just simply do not enforce our laws, unless Four Corners notices.
Elaugaufein
Member
Some of it is that the system is expected to be semi-self policing but the reality is that most people don't know the current NMW, casual workers are probably the group least likely to know they should be getting paid more and I'd be surprised if anyone who's never paid wages out has looked at the award rates for even their industry in the last 12 months. So no one reports these things. Further the peope getting bent over the hardest are least capable of handling the financial and career risk even if they do know.
I am just not sure what to say anymore. But I am quite sad.
http://www.nauru-news.com/#!Stateme...selfharm-injury/cjds/57271d4c0cf228cf6d4f86ca
http://www.nauru-news.com/#!Stateme...selfharm-injury/cjds/57271d4c0cf228cf6d4f86ca
"Stop people setting fire to themselves after months of indefinite detention on remote tropical island nations in prison like conditions run by Serko contractors who sell shower access for sex" doesn't quite have the same ring to it as "stop the boats".
Every Labor and Liberal voter is to blame for this.
roosters93
Member
You and I read the article quite differently I think. To me it was positing that such a mythology (somewhat) like the one you describe exists about Howard but it isn't true.
The article said (accurately in my mind) that the majority of free market reform was already completed or in progress because of the Hawke-Keating government.
It also supposes that the reason Hockey and co fell flat on their face when they tried to emulate what they believed to be the essence of Howard govt economic policy was that they didn't have the middle class welfare of Howard to go with it
Candescence
Member
Howard was an incredibly odd duck. There are things I will happily applaud the guy for, but he was also an extremely bad influence on the political climate. He was a shrewd political operator at times, but a lot of his successes were due to luck and bribing the electorate with middle-class welfare. If either Tampa, 9/11 and Mark Latham's self-destruction hadn't occurred when they did, he would've been booted out of office long before his ill-fated venture with Workchoices.
Edit: Morgan polls with 51-49 with Labor in the lead. Turnbull and Morrison better hope that budget pitch is somehow amazing, because the polls are trending towards Labor.
Edit: Morgan polls with 51-49 with Labor in the lead. Turnbull and Morrison better hope that budget pitch is somehow amazing, because the polls are trending towards Labor.
D.Lo
Member
He could be sneaky, but was lucky as fuck economically.
And worst of all left us near-broke after selling every fucking thing he could. A once in a lifetime gift in the mining boom and instead of spending it on infrastructure, a wealth fund, research, education, or god forbid the needy - it went straight to pork barreling with upper middle class welfare, which give us a massive structural deficit which is politically hard to unwind. I remember poor Wayne Swan rolling back the ridiculously unneeded baby bonus just for second babies, and the TV cut to mothers losing their shit because it was 'so unfair'. And the super tax concessions and capital gains tax discount are both degenerate.
Elaugaufein
Member
They are going to have a hard time coming up with an amazing budget pitch while sticking to "Spending Problem not a Revenue Problem" and trying to give tax cuts to like the top ~20% of the electorate and corporations. And by a hard time I mean they are going to need magic (or a sudden influx of boats or a terrorist attack).
Though given its not really an election yet that lead may be soft (since Labor isn't the incumbent) , it's also well within MoE of a Liberal win. But the trend recently is such that neither of the previous is likely to make them feel better.
Candescence
Member
Just watched Four Corners. Well, that's certainly not gonna help the government's case on housing affordability, I kept muttering "holy fucking shit" with the stuff that kept coming up. Seriously. Suburbs with a quarter to a half of buildings being owned by investors. Entire apartment buildings with about ten percent of the lights on at most. The quality of new houses and apartments dropping because builders don't care and it's really all just to cash in on the housing bubble. A lot of shady shit from the banks and various stuff that recalls previous housing crashes in Ireland and the USA. Interest rates being in such a precarious state that about a single percent rise could cause a shockwave.
Seriously, someone needs to deflate that bubble, or pop it while trying to. Really, a crash right now is preferable to a crash later if the bubble gets bigger. I honestly think sometimes that housing investment should be severely limited if not outright banned, it's terrifying to see such a scarce societal need be this kind of commodity.
Seriously, someone needs to deflate that bubble, or pop it while trying to. Really, a crash right now is preferable to a crash later if the bubble gets bigger. I honestly think sometimes that housing investment should be severely limited if not outright banned, it's terrifying to see such a scarce societal need be this kind of commodity.
Elaugaufein
Member
Scarce resources are commodities pretty much by definition though (short of making all transfers of a scarce resource go through some kind of public exchange there's not much you can do about that). And making housing desirable to supply is sensible policy. The problem is more making housing desirable to supply temporarily (via investment property / rent) rather than permanently through building and selling new houses via messed up incentives that provide no real reason to create new housing.
Agree on all the other points though.
D.Lo
Member
It highlighted a bunch of issues. Turning property into an investment-only industry just seems so counter productive for the economy long term.
No mention of massive immigration or foreign investors pushing prices up. Certainly those Melbourne apartments are packed with Chinese money being stashed. And we need all the new houses nor for millennials but for migrants (either buying or renting), which is also something the government controls.
Weird how the libs often can be racist, when high net migration achieves two of their biggest goals, low wages and keeps the poor out of wealth.
No mention of massive immigration or foreign investors pushing prices up. Certainly those Melbourne apartments are packed with Chinese money being stashed. And we need all the new houses nor for millennials but for migrants (either buying or renting), which is also something the government controls.
Weird how the libs often can be racist, when high net migration achieves two of their biggest goals, low wages and keeps the poor out of wealth.
The business wing just use it as a wedge. The Tories are probably true believers though, but it wouldn't be the first time their views would be plagued with cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy.
viciouskillersquirrel
Member
Most political philosophies are plagued with contradiction and hypocrisy.
On the left, there's the general trust in science and evidence running up against GMO and nuclear hysteria. The ideal of a tolerant, multicultural, pluralistic society runs up against the fact that some groups' values actively undermine this very thing and see it as an abhorrent, abominable evil. Immigrants are welcomed with open arms while they drive down the very wages of the working class.
Every solution to every political problem has downsides. If this weren't the case, there would be no argument.
On the left, there's the general trust in science and evidence running up against GMO and nuclear hysteria. The ideal of a tolerant, multicultural, pluralistic society runs up against the fact that some groups' values actively undermine this very thing and see it as an abhorrent, abominable evil. Immigrants are welcomed with open arms while they drive down the very wages of the working class.
Every solution to every political problem has downsides. If this weren't the case, there would be no argument.
I personally believe this is a temporary situation due to the fact that we've moved/are moving towards the right quite a lot. For example, if evidence based economists believed it was time to cut pay to workers, you can bet the left would fight tooth and nail. And then you have conflicts like the trees vs public transport protests we've seen on the north shore here recently. I don't think any particular side can claim to trust science and evidence, ideology is stronger.
You're not wrong, although the loony left is generally less represented in parliament than the rabid right.
Also it feels like certain people on the left are very quick to give up their egalitarian values as soon as their privilege is challenged.
viciouskillersquirrel
Member
Left/right dichotomy is about what the goals should even be. If your goal is to maximise society's production of paper clips, for instance, you might be able to find the best policy to achieve this using an evidence-based approach, regardless of the impact this might have on, say, income inequality.
bobnowhere
Member
While the polls are converging, apart from Essential, all the polls still have a very low Labor Primary rate. The Greens have successfully rebounded from their 2013 kicking, the Coalition have been somewhat damaged and Palmer wiped out. If Labor do fall across the line it will probably be on an unprecedented flow of Greens preferences and the Greens are getting tricky with theirs now. It's not really a good story for Labor quite yet.
They can't win an election with 32.5% primary, they got smashed last time at 33.38%. If you look at the latest pollbludger that has Labor ahead, they are still well behind in raw seats and would have to convince every single other to fall across the line.
I'd say there are actual constraints around what makes a society inhabitable. Maximising paper clips at the expense of say farming or maintaining water supply which are non negotiable is not an option.
How best to do the essentials is what should be evidence based. At the moment these essentials, including climate policy, are compromised by politicians and the dichotomy of left and right.
Elaugaufein
Member
You shouldn't look at the Primary as particularly elucidating itself. Labor's going to be at least 10-15% behind as long as their major party position is avoiding wedges and a viable protest party exists to their left and we use a preferential system. Their primary is important only in so far as it's relevant position to other groups not it'd absolute value.
I suspect there are parts of this we fall on the opposite side of then because from my perspective it looks like there's also certain people who are very quick to embrace authoritarianism, mob rule and suppression of dissent in their pursuit of "egalitarianism". And as egalitarian as I may be I want no part of that.
Elaugaufein
Member
Has he done something new and terrible ?
Outside of the loonies, I kind of think both sides want broadly similar goals. I think it's more that the left believe structures are more powerful than people and can determine individual outcomes, and the right believe in the power of the individual to overcome whatever structures are there. So the left see equality as a goal to break down these structures and allow anyone to have a good life. The right see freedom as a goal because they believe it to be the correct means to more or less the same end, at least for those who work for it, and anyone that falls through the cracks likely had it coming.
Blamed refugee suicide attempts on refugee advocates
Less terrible than above, but he also asked for this image to be removed from social media:
bobnowhere
Member
Lights are on but no one's home.
Boom: Down to 1.75% on budget day, this will get interesting.
And maybe a boat!
http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/asylum-seeker-boat-arrives-within-cocos-islands/7379218
Boom: Down to 1.75% on budget day, this will get interesting.
And maybe a boat!
http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/asylum-seeker-boat-arrives-within-cocos-islands/7379218
Elaugaufein
Member
Ahh, I'd heard about that "yesterday" from my perspective due to a late night. Thought he must have done something newer.
That photo makes him look like be found a podium in the middle of a prison break.
Candescence
Member
I thought it makes him look like someone who was holding a flashlight up to his face as if he was about to tell a ghost story around a campfire, except he wasn't aiming it properly.
Elaugaufein
Member
Is anyone doing a Budget OT ? If so can you toss a link in here when it goes up ?
Watch the banks not pass it on.
NAB has already said they will.
I am shocked.
Then again there are the threats of a royal commission floating around.
Elaugaufein
Member
Rate changes are such a double edged sword politically (especially when the rates are so low that a .25% change in rates is a 12.5% change in interest payments). It'll be interesting seeing how they spin the rate cut as a good thing given that under labor the low rates were terrible.
bobnowhere
Member
Yeah pretty much, would give massive credence to Labor's RC.
So, what time is the budget tonight? And what hashtag are we using? #notallbudgets #positivegearing
Oh, and what the fuck is going on with the Crikey layout? It's like I've accidentally somehow opened the mobile version of their site, but on my desktop. Big fonts everywhere.
4 Corners last night already has, complete with a business reporter on the ABC who had her salary fudged BY THE BANK so she could get her loan. Unfuckingbelievable.
Oh, and what the fuck is going on with the Crikey layout? It's like I've accidentally somehow opened the mobile version of their site, but on my desktop. Big fonts everywhere.
Elaugaufein
Member
ABC appears to be starting coverage at 19:30 AEST and the Budget.gov.au wesbite says the same thing.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked