Jump to content
Melbourne Football

Domestic Politics


cadete
 Share

Recommended Posts

Nothing interesting in the federal election unless Shorten manages to throw it away somehow, which he is having a good crack at.

Whole thing is pretty shit, tired of the government putting it's hand out left, right, and center once you make more money than the average person, and Labor is going to take it even further.

But what can you do, just make even more or go to a low tax country for a few years.

Edited by Tesla
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jw1739 said:

Most of us are probably over both.

I think Folau is perfectly entitled to express his opinion about what he regards as sin and his belief that sinners will suffer punishment in a different life. IMO Rugby Australia (or whatever it is called) is the party showing small-mindedness and intolerance, not Folau. Folau is not personally threatening anyone specifically and should be free to express his views.

I see that Barry Humphries has just had his name removed from the Barry Award for expressing views on transgender issues.

Totally sick of political correctness permeating every nook and cranny of our society.

So I take it that you are in the freedom of expression camp trumps contractual obligation camp?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, NewConvert said:

So I take it that you are in the freedom of expression camp trumps contractual obligation camp?

I don't believe that sports bodies such as Rugby Australia should be making socio-political statements or undertakings of the type that they have. They are just being politically correct. And I believe that if they do make such statements or undertakings they should be careful not to intrude into the freedom of expression of individuals. Not to allow individuals to express dissenting opinions is hypocritical and contradicts the very "inclusivity" that they say they are promoting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Tesla said:

Nothing interesting in the federal election unless Shorten manages to throw it away somehow, which he is having a good crack at.

Whole thing is pretty shit, tired of the government putting it's hand out left, right, and center once you make more money than the average person, and Labor is going to take it even further.

But what can you do, just make even more or go to a low tax country for a few years.

Just to elaborate on this, the problem is that it's not just the income tax rate, it's that there are so many things targeting people on middle class incomes.

Firstly you have tax offsets for low income, so their tax rate isn't as high as the tax brackets suggest, where as middle and high income earners don't get this. Then you have the MLS, where someone earning just 90k+ a year has to either pay an extra 2% tax or buy health insurance they don't need. Speaking of health insurance, the subsidies fall off pretty quickly as well around that mark. Then you have all the benefits that get cut as well, eg things like childcare subsidy etc.

The net effect is that middle income earners face marginal tax rates of 100%+ in some cases.

All taxes and/or lack of subsidy based on income should be bundled into the income tax rates, for transparency reasons, and to ensure there aren't cases where ludicrous marginal tax rates are in effect, causing massive economic inefficiency.

Edited by Tesla
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/20/2019 at 9:10 PM, jw1739 said:

I don't believe that sports bodies such as Rugby Australia should be making socio-political statements or undertakings of the type that they have. They are just being politically correct. And I believe that if they do make such statements or undertakings they should be careful not to intrude into the freedom of expression of individuals. Not to allow individuals to express dissenting opinions is hypocritical and contradicts the very "inclusivity" that they say they are promoting.

I think that this why I would like to see the whole thing end up in the courts - to test the limits. As far as socio-political statements are concerned, this has always been a contentious issue within sports, specially professional sports. After all in the USA there used to be a white players basketball league and a non-white players basketball league. In small communities the sports club forms part of teh social glue. And of course Hitler knew the power of sport to promote nazism.

So I am not adverse to sports making statements but I do wonder where the limits are both as to how far they should lead/follow and how effective they are in achieving/promoting those goals.

I will also add that when reporter Scott McIntyre was sacked by SBS for posting contemptuous post about the Anzacs, the then Freedom Commissioner Tim Wilson, now federal MP, said that it was a contractual matter as Scott was not being prevented from expressing his views. These days it appears that he has changed his mind without explaining what caused that change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Tesla said:

Just to elaborate on this, the problem is that it's not just the income tax rate, it's that there are so many things targeting people on middle class incomes.

Firstly you have tax offsets for low income, so their tax rate isn't as high as the tax brackets suggest, where as middle and high income earners don't get this. Then you have the MLS, where someone earning just 90k+ a year has to either pay an extra 2% tax or buy health insurance they don't need. Speaking of health insurance, the subsidies fall off pretty quickly as well around that mark. Then you have all the benefits that get cut as well, eg things like childcare subsidy etc.

The net effect is that middle income earners face marginal tax rates of 100%+ in some cases.

All taxes and/or lack of subsidy based on income should be bundled into the income tax rates, for transparency reasons, and to ensure there aren't cases where ludicrous marginal tax rates are in effect, causing massive economic inefficiency.

I agree with the lack of transparency. Interestingly, when Peter Costello was Treasurer he asked former banker and mining exec John Ralph to conduct an inquiry into the tax system (and very much a right winger), the report had transparency as a major concern. Specifically he wanted to eliminate Trusts. Peter Costello got rolled & AFAIK the coalition did not implement any of the recommendations. Sadly the ALP ducked the issue.

Also the ones who are affected the most with respect to marginal rates are those on low incomes because as soon as circumstances change all subsidies get removed, leaving them worse off. In the UK  both Blair and Cameron amended the system to taper off the subsidies. Again AFAIK there is no move afoot in Australia by the major parties to remove this disincentive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NewConvert said:

I agree with the lack of transparency. Interestingly, when Peter Costello was Treasurer he asked former banker and mining exec John Ralph to conduct an inquiry into the tax system (and very much a right winger), the report had transparency as a major concern. Specifically he wanted to eliminate Trusts. Peter Costello got rolled & AFAIK the coalition did not implement any of the recommendations. Sadly the ALP ducked the issue.

Also the ones who are affected the most with respect to marginal rates are those on low incomes because as soon as circumstances change all subsidies get removed, leaving them worse off. In the UK  both Blair and Cameron amended the system to taper off the subsidies. Again AFAIK there is no move afoot in Australia by the major parties to remove this disincentive.

Actually, the coalition implemented numerous recommendations of the Ralph Report, the big one they steared clear of was the recommendation to move away from the long standing principle of only taxing realised gains (whether income or capital). 

Also, FWIW, the Ralph Report did not recommend the eliminatiom of trusts and to think it did just shows the lack of understanding (general population and polititians included) of what a trust is which leads to everyone conflating the general law and tax aspects of trusts. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, NewConvert said:

 

Also the ones who are affected the most with respect to marginal rates are those on low incomes because as soon as circumstances change all subsidies get removed, leaving them worse off. In the UK  both Blair and Cameron amended the system to taper off the subsidies. Again AFAIK there is no move afoot in Australia by the major parties to remove this disincentive.

Well I suppose it depends on your definition of low income, but the point where the most significant subsidy cuts and marginal tax rates occur is at what I would classify as middle incomes.

But that's exactly the point, unless we're going to go through all the possible permutations, the lack of transparency makes it hard to say.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TBH I wish that we would reduce the number of elections in which we have to participate. IMO quite a few people suffer from "election overload" and I think that reduces the degree of thought that they actually use before casting their vote. I'd like to see all our parliaments move to a 5-year term, all State and Commonwealth elections held simultaneously, and a common electoral roll, regulations and regulatory body. Just as an example, applying to two separate organizations for a postal vote doesn't make sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jw1739 said:

TBH I wish that we would reduce the number of elections in which we have to participate. IMO quite a few people suffer from "election overload" and I think that reduces the degree of thought that they actually use before casting their vote. I'd like to see all our parliaments move to a 5-year term, all State and Commonwealth elections held simultaneously, and a common electoral roll, regulations and regulatory body. Just as an example, applying to two separate organizations for a postal vote doesn't make sense to me.

4 year terms for my taste and common electoral roll. I don't think that the state and federal elections should be held on the same date but if all states/territories held their elections on the same day it would work. So three dates: one federal, one for all state elections and one for all municipal elections.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, NewConvert said:

4 year terms for my taste and common electoral roll. I don't think that the state and federal elections should be held on the same date but if all states/territories held their elections on the same day it would work. So three dates: one federal, one for all state elections and one for all municipal elections.

@NewConvert What's your view on "compulsory voting" and associated matters? I really object to having to number every single box when all I wish to do is number those candidates whom I feel can do a reasonable job if elected. The rest of them I know little or nothing about, and I find I vote in the reverse order - that is I nominate my least-acceptable as my last choice and work upwards from there. I just think that it is stupid to have to give some sort of preference to every candidate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

@NewConvert What's your view on "compulsory voting" and associated matters? I really object to having to number every single box when all I wish to do is number those candidates whom I feel can do a reasonable job if elected. The rest of them I know little or nothing about, and I find I vote in the reverse order - that is I nominate my least-acceptable as my last choice and work upwards from there. I just think that it is stupid to have to give some sort of preference to every candidate.

I am a firm believer in "compulsory voting" - in practice it reduces hyper-partisanship, provides a wider pool of candidates and reduces extremism. Over time I have found that when a governing party strays too far away from competence or to an extreme, the voters who would otherwise be disengaged will become engaged and turf them out. Preferential voting is the only way I have of reaching a compromise candidate with the other 120k electors in my seat.

For the house of reps, you don't have to number all of the boxes you can leave the last candidate unmarked and that still counts. However, like yourself I also work backwards, from the most objectionable one gets the last box and then work my way up to the preferred candidate. On two occasions I did not have an objectionable candidate but no party enthused me so I voted blank. I think the most I have ever seen for a house of reps ballot paper were six candidates, although I believe that some other seats have had up to eight. I don't think that it is a big burden.

Where I do have objections is the Senate. That is ridiculous. The whole thing is skewered to vote above the line and let the parties decide the preferences. If you don't like the way the parties have done preferences then you are going to spend a lot of time writing the ballot and then checking to ensure that you haven't screwed it up. Now I am not sure whether you were here in the 80s when this system was introduced. The above the line was introduced to reduce the number of invalid votes which was about 40% for the Senate compared to less than 5% for teh house of reps. Thus they introduced the above the line system and that did reduce the invalid number of ballots.

I am hoping that they introduce electronic voting so that the voter just drags and drops the numbers next to the candidates name. And no I don't mean vote at home over the web. You would still attend the voting place where the touch screens would be networked locally (no external connection) and a printer. This would have the advantage of providing a quick count although not final, the printed ballot can be used as proof of voting, and it is easier for the voters to use. The disadvantage is that the election coverage by the networks will be drastically reduced. Of course the results would only be broadcast one hour after WA has finished voting for federal elections. Note that postal votes would still be by paper which means that in close elections the results would still drag on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/04/2019 at 9:10 PM, jw1739 said:

I don't believe that sports bodies such as Rugby Australia should be making socio-political statements or undertakings of the type that they have. They are just being politically correct. And I believe that if they do make such statements or undertakings they should be careful not to intrude into the freedom of expression of individuals. Not to allow individuals to express dissenting opinions is hypocritical and contradicts the very "inclusivity" that they say they are promoting.

Tend to agree. I think there's a vast difference between a player expressing an opinion via normal channels, versus using the sporting body as a platform to spread that too. Ie im fine with someone expressing their views, no matter how clever or stupid via their social media, like the rest of us do, but i reckon the sporting body would have every right to intervene when it came to matchday expressions etc such as goal celebrations, press conferences etc as that directly is associated with their brand.

Obviously there is a going to be connections made no matter where it comes from, but imo thats the best mix of personal freedoms vs maintaining the integrity of the governing body.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Don't know which thread this belongs in - it could go in quite a few. But IMO it's ridiculous that candidate after candidate is resigning on "political correctness" lines because they made some off-colour remark about something years ago. Who hasn't done something like that? You're not a genuine human being if you don't make a mistake now and then.

The country has just gone stupid with all this crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, jw1739 said:

Don't know which thread this belongs in - it could go in quite a few. But IMO it's ridiculous that candidate after candidate is resigning on "political correctness" lines because they made some off-colour remark about something years ago. Who hasn't done something like that? You're not a genuine human being if you don't make a mistake now and then.

The country has just gone stupid with all this crap.

I mostly agree. There is a time line though where you would need to say have you learnt from this? Example, bagging team mate Tim Wilson a few months ago should lead to dis-endorsement. Having said something in your teens/early 20s or 10 years ago is not a hanging offence. Confession, I had wet dreams as a teenager where I treated girls for my own sexual gratification, that would disqualify me from running for any public office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. CW for Scomo to be gone, he his a perfect example of how of date the Coalition has become and needs a reboot under Frydenburg.

2. What would have happened if a Muslim Sportsman had such comments?

I think everyone can agree that it would have been a much more complicated than total outrage from almost all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, cadete said:

1. CW for Scomo to be gone, he his a perfect example of how of date the Coalition has become and needs a reboot under Frydenburg.

2. What would have happened if a Muslim Sportsman had such comments?

I think everyone can agree that it would have been a much more complicated than total outrage from almost all.

Welcome back.

One thing that bothers me is whether as a Melbournian/Victorian we are the outlier compared to the rest of Oz. I travel to SA a lot for work and I certainly don't detect the animosity that the Feds get in Victoria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/05/2019 at 9:31 PM, NewConvert said:

Welcome back.

One thing that bothers me is whether as a Melbournian/Victorian we are the outlier compared to the rest of Oz. I travel to SA a lot for work and I certainly don't detect the animosity that the Feds get in Victoria.

It also bothers me.

for the opposite reason though.

moving to Victoria was like entering the twilight zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of my views on the next 3years, I think no party will be courageous enough to look at serious tax reform for a very very long time (deductions, NG, superannuation). While I didn’t agree with all the proposed ALP changes I do think our tax system has some serious distortions and leaks. I had hoped that if the ALP got in alongside a more conservative Senate we could potentially of improved some things without upending the economy (kept ALP, in check). Future elections will be fought on ‘small target’ platforms. No leaders will be brave and foolish enough to try what Shorten did....(only in hindsight will we know if that has been good for democracy).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Tangerine said:

Regardless of my views on the next 3years, I think no party will be courageous enough to look at serious tax reform for a very very long time (deductions, NG, superannuation). While I didn’t agree with all the proposed ALP changes I do think our tax system has some serious distortions and leaks. I had hoped that if the ALP got in alongside a more conservative Senate we could potentially of improved some things without upending the economy (kept ALP, in check). Future elections will be fought on ‘small target’ platforms. No leaders will be brave and foolish enough to try what Shorten did....(only in hindsight will we know if that has been good for democracy).

I don't think so. The problem was that Shorten was firing from the hip with his policies and taking a scorched earth approach. In that he didn't care how much collateral damage there was to others as long as he hit his intended targets. The only problem is that his supposed policies were poorly thought through and would more readily be circumvented by wealthier people. Where as middle income earners and small business owners would be fucked over.

It also didn't help that his policies, whilst being touted as "equitable" would still look after unions, in that NG would still be available on new housing, industry funds would still get the full benefits of franking credits (where as an SMSF wouldn't) and unions would still get a full refund of franking credits. Throw in the fact that he called certain deductions a rort, which the Commissioner of Tax stated was not an issue after the ATO had looked into it.

I am going to put my neck out and say that more labor voters engage in tax fraud than liberal voters. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, malloy said:

It also didn't help that his policies, whilst being touted as "equitable" would still look after unions, in that NG would still be available on new housing, industry funds would still get the full benefits of franking credits (where as an SMSF wouldn't) and unions would still get a full refund of franking credits. 

I am going to put my neck out and say that more labor voters engage in tax fraud than liberal voters. 

Yep, well reasoned and argued. I strongly agree with the bit above - franking credits and type of fund. You can't make tax changes that only apply to certain people or types of investment.

But i do not believe the current negative gearing approach is equitable (I say this as a home owner). There is only one housing market - investors compete against first home buyers everywhere. So my view is that since ALL are an 'investment' then either mortgages should be tax deductions (this has the advantage of reducing tax collected) OR negative gearing shouldn't be allowed anywhere (which recognises that property is fundamentally not the same as other investments). What we have is a half-way house that works more to the benefit of investors and those who already own property.

On the last bit, you might be right when it comes to 'tax fraud'. I think many voters of all colours engage in substantial tax minimisation. My view is that any party in Government should give this a look as not all deductions add economic value to Australia. Any additional tax collected should be used to reduce marginal tax rates (which in my opinion are a more equitable approach to tax reform).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tangerine said:

Yep, well reasoned and argued. I strongly agree with the bit above - franking credits and type of fund. You can't make tax changes that only apply to certain people or types of investment.

But i do not believe the current negative gearing approach is equitable (I say this as a home owner). There is only one housing market - investors compete against first home buyers everywhere. So my view is that since ALL are an 'investment' then either mortgages should be tax deductions (this has the advantage of reducing tax collected) OR negative gearing shouldn't be allowed anywhere (which recognises that property is fundamentally not the same as other investments). What we have is a half-way house that works more to the benefit of investors and those who already own property.

On the last bit, you might be right when it comes to 'tax fraud'. I think many voters of all colours engage in substantial tax minimisation. My view is that any party in Government should give this a look as not all deductions add economic value to Australia. Any additional tax collected should be used to reduce marginal tax rates (which in my opinion are a more equitable approach to tax reform).

The way to tackle the negative gearing issue would have been to implement a similar system to that of deferred non-commercial losses. So essentially you would need to be under a certain level of taxable income (before deducting the net investment loss) to be allowed to deduct it. If you weren't then the loss would be carried forward to only be offset against future investment income or if your taxable income dropped below a certain level. This would have utilised a system that would be familar to tax accountants to also allow middle income earners to NG and build wealth.

Regarding the franking credits (and my position on this has changed in that i am full opposed to scrapping credit refunds), the correct and 'equitable' way to have implemented it (as it was largely about SMSFs receiving refunds, and adult chikdren receiving them via investment trusts whi h i will touch on below) would have been to  simply deny franking credits based on either the actuary percentage or whether the assetsderiving the franking credits were seggregated pension assets (dependent on what method is used for tax purposes). This would signal that the policy intention was for it to be equitable.

Regarding the trust withhokdibg tax a more simple metjod to achieve what was the true target, which was essentially giving trust distributions to adult children (usually at uni and earning next to no income) and for the money to actually end ul with the parents is to remove a sub paragraph in s 100A of the 1936 act, which carves out ordinary family dealings from the 'reimbursement' anti avoidance measures. Now ig the kids sctually receive tge funds from their paper distribution then we shouldnt care if they get a refund because they have actually received the income.

On your point about mortgage interest being deductible there are some european countries which allow this, however they also have a notional rent that you declare as income. That way it doesnt distort the benefit of the deductions towards ownership and woukd largely keep ownership and renting on equal footing (albeit you would still have CGT Exemption for main residence). Without having thought about it too much I think bringing to account a notional rent as income would be the way to go if you were going to allow deductions for main res mortgage etc. 

Finally, The distinction between fraud and minimisation is that one is illegal and one is not (as when you push boundaries too much it becomes avoidance). The actual tax fraud I was specifically referring to was nearly every tradey (experience and anecdotally) doing cash jobs and not declaring that income in their tax return, not remitting the GST on that income or who runs the cost of material in renovating or extending their house or garage through their business and claims a deduction for it. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised I was not tagged in this thread.... by @Tesla @malloy or @HeartFc

Anyway I always bore people to shit on here about how if you can run a "No Policy Election" then you fucken do it because its the best strategy to get into Parliament, decides at least over 1/3 elections in Australia at both levels. This strategy made a wooden Tony Abbott a PM FFS.

However its a tactic that basically only really Oppositions can use... yet the ALP gave the Libs they chance to use it instead. Seriously what a fuck up why did Bill not just smile once , shut up about anything that sounded like policy and maybe do a dance with school kids and kick a footy. Instead WE had him making complicated blustery speeches that FFS reminded me of all things the fucken campaign footage of Billy fucken McMahon.

The dumbest thing about the whole result is I know that when the Bigwig Consultants come back to each Party with the reasons for the result the top one will be PPL liked the word "Scomo" and secondly nobody likes being told that an election is over and there vote (that they have to cast is useless). FWIW SCOMO's wife likability will also def be up there.

Seriously why did one person not say to Bill "Keep It Simple Stupid" because his personal performance was so blatantly and obviously bad if he was in Cricket and not Politics he be banned for cheating and back playing Grade Cricket.

At the end of day well played Liberals... you played it simple just kicked it down the guts and hoped for the best, tried to make as less errors and possible and won.

As for the ALP surely now the members leadership vote should not be allowed to be vetoed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ye Billy boy got caught up in the romance of the whole thing and talked his way out of the job. It's kinda like when you meet one of your mrs hot friends at a BBQ and you cant help saying a comment about her when you get home... "She's nice that Tanya chick"... *wife slowly squints eyes* 

Sometimes in life you're better off just shutting the fuck up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, cadete said:

Surprised I was not tagged in this thread.... by @Tesla @malloy or @HeartFc

Anyway I always bore people to shit on here about how if you can run a "No Policy Election" then you fucken do it because its the best strategy to get into Parliament, decides at least over 1/3 elections in Australia at both levels. This strategy made a wooden Tony Abbott a PM FFS.

However its a tactic that basically only really Oppositions can use... yet the ALP gave the Libs they chance to use it instead. Seriously what a fuck up why did Bill not just smile once , shut up about anything that sounded like policy and maybe do a dance with school kids and kick a footy. Instead WE had him making complicated blustery speeches that FFS reminded me of all things the fucken campaign footage of Billy fucken McMahon.

The dumbest thing about the whole result is I know that when the Bigwig Consultants come back to each Party with the reasons for the result the top one will be PPL liked the word "Scomo" and secondly nobody likes being told that an election is over and there vote (that they have to cast is useless). FWIW SCOMO's wife likability will also def be up there.

Seriously why did one person not say to Bill "Keep It Simple Stupid" because his personal performance was so blatantly and obviously bad if he was in Cricket and not Politics he be banned for cheating and back playing Grade Cricket.

At the end of day well played Liberals... you played it simple just kicked it down the guts and hoped for the best, tried to make as less errors and possible and won.

As for the ALP surely now the members leadership vote should not be allowed to be vetoed.

It's that, and it's the fact that elections in Australia are won on the economy, I believe you have said that yourself previously as well.

I know I'm liberal with the word socialisim, but seriously some of the policies they came out with were really starting to get there, and the old labor base aren't socialists. I remember there was one instance where some unionised  mining worker asked shorten why Labor weren't looking after him on his 200k income lol, it was a very minor thing with a minor mention in some news article somewhere along the election path, but in hindsight perhaps a telling sign.

Morrison made things about the economy as soon as he came in, his policies aren't even to the right of center, only tax cuts we may see are for low income earners and the lower end of middle income earners, but retirees and higher income earners were already shitting themselves about labor taking all their money so they didn't need any convincing I suppose.

Edited by Tesla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Tesla said:

I remember there was one instance where some unionised  mining worker asked shorten why Labor weren't looking after him on his 200k income lol, it was a very minor thing with a minor mention in some news article somewhere along the election path, but in hindsight perhaps a telling sign.

Was it this bloke? Billy boy wanted the gulag but his advisors reminded him they weren't build yet. They settled for getting the bloke sacked.

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/i-just-want-to-move-on-with-my-life-tradie-who-was-suspended-after-asking-bill-shorten-a-question-about-tax-breaks-his-silence-as-he-reveals-he-has-landed-a-new-job/ar-AABiLNI

Edited by HeartFc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HeartFc said:

Was it this bloke? Billy boy wanted the gulag but his advisors reminded him they weren't build yet. They settled for getting the bloke sacked.

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/i-just-want-to-move-on-with-my-life-tradie-who-was-suspended-after-asking-bill-shorten-a-question-about-tax-breaks-his-silence-as-he-reveals-he-has-landed-a-new-job/ar-AABiLNI

Yeah that's it, mining port worker not mining worker. I never caught this follow up news, that's actually fucked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ye it was covered a lot here in QLD due to the mining link and being in Port Douglas. It wasn't a great look for Labor and it kinda linked up with the whole Stop Adani campaign. They painted a very anti-mining/working class narrative and you can't do that and expect good numbers in QLD.

I'm currently living in the most lefty suburb in Brisbane and you'd think the planned Adani mine was a fucking concentration camp. T-shirts, bumper stickers and posters absolutely every where! There were even people handing out flyers on the street the week leading into the election - and you know what, good for them, I'm all for it... however... I actually stopped and asked for some details in regards to Adani, I was genuinely interested. Turns out the people handing out the flyers didnt even know where the Adani mine was planned. :droy: 

Speaking of brain dead flea ridden lefties, last Saturday I saw the most ironic example of left wing brainlessness. There's a popular hipster style market here full of independent grocers, breakfast and health bars, buskers, little hippie stands selling magic shells etc etc. Basically all cash only and clearly don't follow every stupid piece of red tape laid out by the council. Its probably most free market libertarian place in the whole city and people fucking love it. So I'm walking around munching on some delicious Hungarian sour cream garlic bread, dodging pot heads and trendies and what do I see nestled amongst a group of small business owners working their arses off to earn some extra black cash...

oh nothing, just a stand promoting the virtues of Socialism. :droy::droy::droy::droy::droy::droy::droy::droy::droy::droy::droy::droy: 

Even Uncle Joe would've snuck in a quick face plant before gulaging the 23 Vietnamese grocers who sell the cheapest avocados in the city. 

Edited by HeartFc
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Really irritated by ScoMo swanning it in Hawaii whilst Australia is in flames. Like Christine Nixon dining out on Black Saturday or whatever it was.

Have these people got no sense of responsibility? Even if he doesn't believe that the climate is getting hotter (perhaps he can't read or doesn't understand graphs and charts, or both?) he should understand what the role of a so-called leader is.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

Really irritated by ScoMo swanning it in Hawaii whilst Australia is in flames. Like Christine Nixon dining out on Black Saturday or whatever it was.

Have these people got no sense of responsibility? Even if he doesn't believe that the climate is getting hotter (perhaps he can't read or doesn't understand graphs and charts, or both?) he should understand what the role of a so-called leader is.

 

Autism will do that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jw1739 said:

Really irritated by ScoMo swanning it in Hawaii whilst Australia is in flames. Like Christine Nixon dining out on Black Saturday or whatever it was.

Have these people got no sense of responsibility? Even if he doesn't believe that the climate is getting hotter (perhaps he can't read or doesn't understand graphs and charts, or both?) he should understand what the role of a so-called leader is.

 

As much as I loath Sco Mo I have to defend him. First the fire brigades are the responsibility of the State governments and AFAIK all state leaders have been on hand. Secondly, unless the navy/army/air force are called in the federal government has little if any role to play. The only possible role would be financial assistance and given their stance on tax cuts and surplus we are unlikely to get much. Third I don't want politicians hampering the operational efforts - if you recall when the tsunami damaged the Fukushima nuclear reactor, the Japanese PM made sure he kept in touch with the rescue team management which annoyed them.

On a separate but related point - I hate the Oprahfication of society where anyone who suffers a mishap has to be publicly comforted by a famous person, in this case the PM. Bring back the stiff upper lip.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, NewConvert said:

As much as I loath Sco Mo I have to defend him. First the fire brigades are the responsibility of the State governments and AFAIK all state leaders have been on hand. Secondly, unless the navy/army/air force are called in the federal government has little if any role to play. The only possible role would be financial assistance and given their stance on tax cuts and surplus we are unlikely to get much. Third I don't want politicians hampering the operational efforts - if you recall when the tsunami damaged the Fukushima nuclear reactor, the Japanese PM made sure he kept in touch with the rescue team management which annoyed them.

On a separate but related point - I hate the Oprahfication of society where anyone who suffers a mishap has to be publicly comforted by a famous person, in this case the PM. Bring back the stiff upper lip.

Being here and interfering are not the same thing. IMO he should be here and not interfering. And it's this continual attempt to view what is happening as a series of unconnected occurrences that annoys me most of all.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-20/andrew-probyn-analysis-scott-morrison-hawaii-holiday/11817356

On your second point I agree completely

Edited by jw1739
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jw1739 said:

Being here and interfering are not the same thing. IMO he should be here and not interfering. And it's this continual attempt to view what is happening as a series of unconnected occurrences that annoys me most of all.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-20/andrew-probyn-analysis-scott-morrison-hawaii-holiday/11817356

On your second point I agree completely

Agreed that their complete obstinance on climate change is disastrous. However, he won teh elction and that is what the majority of Australians believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...