-
LOL should have held the election earlier.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has been told it is "very unlikely" he can convene Parliament before June 30 in a danger sign for his ability to legislate income tax cuts for millions of workers due to take effect on July 1.
The delay has forced the government to look at retrospective action to ensure ten million workers receive a tax offset in their tax returns worth up to $1080 a year and promised in the April 2 budget.
... -
@NTA said in Aussie Politics:
Some analysis suggesting PHON preferences had a more prominent effect than Palmer
So ON get 25% of LNP's primary vote and Tom McIlroy thinks that means Qld voted for Hanson?
-
@NTA said in Aussie Politics:
Some analysis suggesting PHON preferences had a more prominent effect than Palmer
Considering they preferenced the LNP and considering they had to vote would they have otherwise voted Labor? I doubt it.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Aussie Politics:
Considering they preferenced the LNP and considering they had to vote would they have otherwise voted Labor? I doubt it.
You could make a list of Labor seats twice as long where Greens preferences exceed the two party margin. It is meaningless - these voters are always going to preference Labor over the Coalition. This would have some merit if Labor bled votes to a centerist party or an independent candidate that otherwise could have gone their way (which ironically only happened to the Libs in Indi this election).
That said the Coalition need to take a long hard look at how independents are being deployed against them before the next election. While the Palmer/Coalition relationship in Queensland was scrutinized by the media, Labor coordinated with independents in Wentworth, Cowper, Indi and Warringah to harm the coalition in equal measure. Perhaps because it was geographically desperate or because they were independents - but this is something to watch going into the election - particularly given Get Up's involvement.
Also might be worth exploring supporting some independents in some seats that will never go for the Lib branding. They should win Warringah back in their own right next election (much like Bennelong post Howard) but inner city seats like Melbourne and Mayo that went left several cycles ago would be ideal targets.
-
-
A few right-wingers using the election victory to strike another blow in the culture wars: https://www.smh.com.au/federal-election-2019/the-election-s-ultimate-lesson-is-about-mainstream-australian-values-20190520-p51pf3.html
I agree that the woke Twitter left in Australia consists mainly of out-of-touch morons, but I actually don't think that's why Labor lost the election.
My theory (and like every explanation of what happened, it's only a theory) is that the primary vote driver was economic management. People were uneasy about Shorten's proposed changes to taxation, and saw Morrison and the Coalition as a safe pair of hands with economically turbulent waters on the horizon.
Of course nobody appreciated the left wing of the Labor party trying to police the behaviour of everyone to their right, but I just don't think that was on anyone's mind when they entered the polling booth.
Whether it's justified or not, people still regard the Coalition as superior economic managers. Labor tried to fight the battle on economic grounds, which was the fatal flaw of their strategy. It was a field on which they could never win, outside of the inner-city progressives.
Labor succeed when they focus on social infrastructure- schools, health, welfare and yes even climate change. It doesn't succeed 100% of the time, but certainly suits them far more than fighting an election on taxation reform. It's the old mum/dad phenomenon that also happens in the States.
-
@barbarian said in Aussie Politics:
Whether it's justified or not, people still regard the Coalition as superior economic managers. Labor tried to fight the battle on economic grounds, which was the fatal flaw of their strategy. It was a field on which they could never win, outside of the inner-city progressives.
The swing maps I've seen show inner city "affluent" electorates tended toward Labor while the less affluent electorates moved toward the coalition.
Economic management is a broad topic and simply holding up graphs showing the changes in taxation, debt, deficit, surplus, etc you can paint any picture you want.
However, some analysts are saying that Labor never explained where the money was coming from, which I find interesting: franking credits and housing investment wind backs were pretty obvious I would have thought?
The Libs are also promising tax cuts without specifying where that money comes from, particularly a point blank refusal to answer questions in the $77B high bracket relief.
-
@NTA said in Aussie Politics:
@barbarian said in Aussie Politics:
Whether it's justified or not, people still regard the Coalition as superior economic managers. Labor tried to fight the battle on economic grounds, which was the fatal flaw of their strategy. It was a field on which they could never win, outside of the inner-city progressives.
The swing maps I've seen show inner city "affluent" electorates tended toward Labor while the less affluent electorates moved toward the coalition.
That makes sense as the more affluent you are, the more you concern yourself with higher order issues. Maslow's hierarchy.
Economic management is a broad topic and simply holding up graphs showing the changes in taxation, debt, deficit, surplus, etc you can paint any picture you want.
You can rapidly dismiss wishful thinking on the basis of data.
However, some analysts are saying that Labor never explained where the money was coming from, which I find interesting: franking credits and housing investment wind backs were pretty obvious I would have thought?
Ignoring the reports that Bowen's modelling was based on outdated information and that the revenue measures still didn't add up to the spending, Labor didn't explain why it should be considered better placed to determine how your money should be spent.
The Libs are also promising tax cuts without specifying where that money comes from, particularly a point blank refusal to answer questions in the $77B high bracket relief.
It addresses bracket creep which is fundamentally sound policy. It doesn't come from anything, they're just not receiving it.
-
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
It addresses bracket creep which is fundamentally sound policy. It doesn't come from anything, they're just not receiving it.
Bracket creep would have to be analysed in the context of slowing wages growth and general economy as well, no?
And if they're not receiving the tax, how do they forward project funding services for an aging population? Who pays for that?
-
@NTA said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
It addresses bracket creep which is fundamentally sound policy. It doesn't come from anything, they're just not receiving it.
Bracket creep would have to be analysed in the context of slowing wages growth and general economy as well, no?
Simply against inflation.
And if they're not receiving the tax, how do they forward project funding services for an aging population? Who pays for that?
A growing population combined with investment in superannuation so self-funded retirees aren't drawing a pension. Something people could do if politicians stopped changing the rules every 10 minutes.
-
That functional retard Palachook was out and about with the hard hat and hi-vis vest shamelessly crapping on about how frustrated she is about Adani and how she wants the process finalised. What complete bs. Her govt has done everything to stop it and now the election has freaked her out. At some stage Labor will have to decide if they actually want to continue to be a party that represents the worker or a party that indulges the whims of inner city lefties. It can't be both anymore.
-
@NTA said in Aussie Politics:
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
It addresses bracket creep which is fundamentally sound policy. It doesn't come from anything, they're just not receiving it.
Bracket creep would have to be analysed in the context of slowing wages growth and general economy as well, no?
And if they're not receiving the tax, how do they forward project funding services for an aging population? Who pays for that?
Those are real issues but not ones that Labor can prosecute politically given their own agenda. They would get outflanked if they tried to run an “economic responsible” line. Bowen tried and failed.
-
@ACT-Crusader @Rancid-Schnitzel Labor were looking to restore penalty rates, increase Newstart, deliver pay boosts to childcare, and a few other things that would help actual workers and those using social support.
How is that NOT looking after workers or pursuing a reasonable approach to wages stagnation and a slowing economy?
-
@NTA said in Aussie Politics:
@ACT-Crusader @Rancid-Schnitzel Labor were looking to restore penalty rates, increase Newstart, deliver pay boosts to childcare, and a few other things that would help actual workers and those using social support.
How is that NOT looking after workers or pursuing a reasonable approach to wages stagnation and a slowing economy?
Increase Newstart - what’s the incentive there? There is no evidence that an increased benefit improves people’s chances of finding employment. And an increase does cost the budget a fair whack.
Deliver pay boosts to childcare - there is no guarantee that would actually occur. This would be a matter for the Fair Work Commission and given the relevant unions have already run a failed case, did Labor think that them just intervening would make it so? Doesn’t work like that. Unless Labor was proposing to legislate then it was out of their hands.
Restore penalty rates - probably one of the great myths of the campaign. Gillard set up the process that enabled this decision to occur. Despite the rhetoric around it, the 4 year review started well before Abbott/Turnbull were in power. So when Shorten said as a Minister for Industrial Relations said he would respect the decision of the umpire, he was not so beholden to the union movement. Then when they got a decision they didn’t like he copped out. Anyway the decision itself doesn’t affect that many people - only those on awards in retail and hospitality that actually work on Sundays. Plus they still get penalty rates it’s just that they were reduced by Fair Work not abolished like the ACTU would have everyone believe.
-
@NTA said in Aussie Politics:
@ACT-Crusader @Rancid-Schnitzel Labor were looking to restore penalty rates, increase Newstart, deliver pay boosts to childcare, and a few other things that would help actual workers and those using social support.
How is that NOT looking after workers or pursuing a reasonable approach to wages stagnation and a slowing economy?
Penalty rates were subject to review thanks to Kevin Rudd's government under s.156 of the Fair Work Act 2009. They established the independent Fair Work Commission. So to have Shorten tweet this following the union challenge is a gross act of hypocrisy
I agree with increasing Newstart given it's basically unlivable and the impost is Sweet FA on the budget.
Childcare doesn't deserve pay boosts. The argument for it is spurious given it relies on qualifications that are mandated by clueless clowns. Qualifications for babysitting. Doing what parents all around the world do without recompense but on limited hours. The Productivity Commission pointed out it was likely to be inefficient and ineffective. That's before we acknowledge that Labor's policy only covered half of the employees and the for-profit sector is doing fine.
-
@ACT-Crusader said in Aussie Politics:
Increase Newstart - what’s the incentive there? There is no evidence that an increased benefit improves people’s chances of finding employment. And an increase does cost the budget a fair whack.
As @antipodean says: is unliveable right now and hasn't changed in real terms for a couple of decades, in fact had probably gone backwards against CPI.
No doubt child care needs reform but every industry does at a certain point - in this case to go beyond just colouring in and singing songs. There are links to better outcomes for kids in early childhood education (particularly disadvantaged kids). While I disagree with increased duration of formal education, as all it does is create good little office either drones IMHO, there needs to be a better approach to education from ages 1 through to mid teens. Rising tide, all boats etc
Removal of penalty rates was supposed to create extra jobs and give the economy a kick along. It has so far failed to do this, so restoring them should not hurt anyone, tho at this point it's just shuffling deck chairs
The RBA is considering a rate cut next month. This isn't a victory unless your LVR is in a bad position. Where's the good financial management of the last 6 years gotten us?
Aussie Politics