2019 Federal Election

[Hacky McAxe]

I find it all funny. I know the problems with climate change and I know the socio-economics that it may cause, but I also don't really care about humanity so it's all funny for me.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

I should also point out that Labor's policies would most likely lead to long term economic issues but that's another thing altogether.

 

[deimus]

Actually no mate... I'm between jobs and get ZERO government support. Do I struggle? Yes absolutely. Do I EXPECT a government handout because I'm struggling? Absolutely not.

Government support hasn't changed much, but with a majority in the HOR and possibly coming in the Senate, the only people that might be worried are dole bludgers who had zero intentions of ever working anyway, now being forced to work.

Why suddenly because the LNP got in are mass jobs going to be lost? ALP supporters scaremongering at it's finest... it's that sort of rubbish which got them nuked in this election.

I find it funny because of all this Chicken Little "the sky is falling" doom and gloom BS by pathetic ALP supporters who are having a massive ragequit/cry because their party didn't get voted in.

As I said, they only have their local members to thank for not pulling their weight and helping out the local community enough to get voted back in.

Why don't you deserve support? Don't you deserve some help when you land on hard times? You've contributed to society and I assume paid taxes in the past. The fact that you see welfare as only dole bludgers is quite the conservative way of looking at things. As for Labor running the massive scare campaign well that's not even worth arguing about. My point is not massive job losses are coming but rather the attacks on the unemployed and underprivileged that always come after the LNP get enough power to do as they wish are. If the LNP determine you're a lifter and not a leaner you've got nothing to worry about.

 

[Flanagun]

Broooooo what are you on about lol. If he knows he was innocent all along, why the fuck would he keep people around who were trying to bring him down with false accusations which came out to be exactly that lol. Ffs it’s innocent until proven guilty not guilty until proven innocent, and why should any respect be shown to the people under him who tried bringing him down? Like what in the actual oblivion is that shit

Also what medaling ffs lol the left keeps sayin that. They also keep saying he should be impeached. On what basis should he be impeached ffs lol. Like why are you guys still so offended by trump. What rights has he stolen from you personally? And people in general? How is your life worse off?

He may be innocent of some of the charges that have been levelled against him.... that does NOT give him the right to dismiss impartial people who were appointed to investigate him. But he screams bias and little sheep like you lap it up, so he gets away with it.... in what other situation does someone accused of wrongdoing have the opportunity to meddle in their own trial? To do so isn’t right and honestly man.... if you can’t see that, there’s just no hope for you. No rational person would find someone dismissing people appointed to investigate them for wrongdoing anything but highly sus.


What has he done to offend me? A better question is what has he done for you to convince you to overlook his obvious faults?

Let’s just give murderers the power to dismiss judges from their own trials or pressure them until they are confident of an outcome they like, why don’t we?

Yikes!

 

[Flanagun]

I should also point out that Labor's policies would most likely lead to long term economic issues but that's another thing altogether.

You think Liberal policies won’t? What do you think they will do when they run out of public assets and services to sell? Produce a goose that lays golden eggs? At very least, your comment calls for elaboration, my man.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

You think Liberal policies won’t? What do you think they will do when they run out of public assets and services to sell? Produce a goose that lays golden eggs? At very least, your comment calls for elaboration, my man.

The elaboration takes about 20 books worth of economic discussion but basically put, Liberals policies lead to less money for lower economics leading to a larger gap between rich and poor. Labor's policies lead to larger business being forced off shore along with long term economic damage through things like climate policy and high level tax.

Don't get me wrong though. What Labor was planning was absolutely needed as we're at a point where we can either destroy the economy or the environment. But Labor's policies destroy the economy while Liberals destroy the environment.

 

[Mr Invisible]

Just trying to cast my mind back to the last election that the ALP got in, I don't remember this whole "doomsday prophecies" and "the world is going to end" approach.

I'm wondering if voters were also concerned that if ALP got in, the floodgates would open with boat arrivals again.

You think Liberal policies won’t? What do you think they will do when they run out of public assets and services to sell? Produce a goose that lays golden eggs? At very least, your comment calls for elaboration, my man.

Policies and economics don't just rely on local resources. They also rely heavily on the world markets.

Lets say Australian steel is a resource in Australia that brings in 40% of the countries revenue, and coal another 40%. So 80% of the countries revenue is from two resources. The USA and England buy 100% of the resources that we export.

China suddenly pop up "hey guyz.. we can offer coal and steel at same quantities, but 80% less cost than Australia".
USA/England "Wow okay we'll now buy 50% of our steel and coal from China at a cheaper rate.

Australia then loses 50% of the 80% of it's revenue from coal and steel, simply because another player in the market has bottomed out their resource prices.

That's not the ALP or LNP's fault, its just shifting world markets and economics.

Why don't you deserve support? Don't you deserve some help when you land on hard times? You've contributed to society and I assume paid taxes in the past. The fact that you see welfare as only dole bludgers is quite the conservative way of looking at things. As for Labor running the massive scare campaign well that's not even worth arguing about. My point is not massive job losses are coming but rather the attacks on the unemployed and underprivileged that always come after the LNP get enough power to do as they wish are. If the LNP determine you're a lifter and not a leaner you've got nothing to worry about.

Newstart cuts off (reduces to $0 payout) when a partnership earns more than $980 a fortnight ($490 per week). Wifey pulls in ~$800-$1000 a week (depending on overtime, days of work, and tips). We pay $600 per week in rent alone, leaving us $200-$400 per week odd. From that comes private health cover, electricity bills (partial), water bills (partial), gas bills (partial), monthly phone and internet bills, NRMA membership (monthly), pet insurance (monthly), dog food, petrol, parking passes for her work (monthly), and our groceries.

Add to that me dealing with / working on building myself (psychologically) back up from a mental illness brought back by previous employer, looking at a complete career shift with no idea what I want to do next, and living off savings .. as you can probably guess... things are definitely tight.

Rental assistance or even something small would be nice, and mental health isn't deemed a disability unless it's lifetime and major.

When I reference welfare as "dole bludgers", I refer to those who sit around all day with zero intention of ever working, yet are perfectly able to. They choose not too because tax payers are paying their way. If they were working and contributing to the economy it would mean less government handouts required, meaning there could be more there for those that genuinely need it or fall on tough times and need a little help.

LNP have already brought in tax cuts that people will see in the current financial year meaning people earning up to $126,000 will get $1,080 back at tax time. That means myself and my wife should get something back (having bother worked in the past financial year).

They are talking about calling in parliament ASAP and getting stage 2 of the rebates pushed through before July 1 deadline, lowering tax brackets again.

Good article here talks about "what next" based on their policies.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05...t-now-for-scott-morrisons-government/11128158

 

[Hacky McAxe]

There is of course other things to point out. As Dawgfather mentioned, Australia has little impact on the climate from an energy usage perspective as we only provide 1.3% of the CO2 emissions globally, but he ignored the fact that we emit more CO2 per person than USA, China and India (the big 3 polluters). That's like a rich person eating lobster and telling the poor people they should eat less bread to save food.

He also failed to mention the fact that most of the pollution from China (the biggest polluter) is thanks to coal we provide.

 

[Mr Invisible]

But Labor's policies destroy the economy while Liberals destroy the environment.

This is what I don't get... how are policies destroying the environment? It seems a bit of a daft arguement to be wasting money with carbon credits and offsets and all this shit.

CO2 emissions cost nothing, or don't have to. It's the Greens putting a price on the environment... a price that doesn't actually exist.

It's not like baby Jesus or the earths magma core is demanding payment for it's resources.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Labor's biggest mistake was refusing to say what they planned to do regarding Adani. And sadly, their approach was right. If they said that they'd stop Adani then they'd please the Greens but they'd piss of the moderates. If they said that they'd allow Adani then they'd piss off the Greens but appease the moderates.

Fact is that they probably would have allowed Adani and for good reason. It's a good project that could he refined to help combat climate change. But their inability to focus on the issue caused too much confusion.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

This is what I don't get... how are policies destroying the environment? It seems a bit of a daft arguement to be wasting money with carbon credits and offsets and all this shit.

CO2 emissions cost nothing, or don't have to. It's the Greens putting a price on the environment... a price that doesn't actually exist.

It's not like baby Jesus or the earths magma core is demanding payment for it's resources.

It's a very complex issue. Oddly enough most economists support carbon credits and carbon tax as a way to combat climate change. But in the end it's just a deterrent and a deterrent doesn't always work. But it's better than just pretending the problem doesn't exist and as I said, economists generally support it.

But in regard to the whole credit/debit thing. CO2 has a long term environmental impact which results in an environmental cost. Putting a tax on CO2 encourages less emissions. Reducing emissions through use of emission neutral technology provides carbon credit as you're countering the CO2 increase.

 

[deimus]

Newstart cuts off (reduces to $0 payout) when a partnership earns more than $980 a fortnight ($490 per week). Wifey pulls in ~$800-$1000 a week (depending on overtime, days of work, and tips). We pay $600 per week in rent alone, leaving us $200-$400 per week odd. From that comes private health cover, electricity bills (partial), water bills (partial), gas bills (partial), monthly phone and internet bills, NRMA membership (monthly), pet insurance (monthly), dog food, petrol, parking passes for her work (monthly), and our groceries.

Add to that me dealing with / working on building myself (psychologically) back up from a mental illness brought back by previous employer, looking at a complete career shift with no idea what I want to do next, and living off savings .. as you can probably guess... things are definitely tight.

Rental assistance or even something small would be nice, and mental health isn't deemed a disability unless it's lifetime and major.

When I reference welfare as "dole bludgers", I refer to those who sit around all day with zero intention of ever working, yet are perfectly able to. They choose not too because tax payers are paying their way. If they were working and contributing to the economy it would mean less government handouts required, meaning there could be more there for those that genuinely need it or fall on tough times and need a little help.

LNP have already brought in tax cuts that people will see in the current financial year meaning people earning up to $126,000 will get $1,080 back at tax time. That means myself and my wife should get something back (having bother worked in the past financial year).

Why does it have to be this way? In a country as well off as Australia why can't we offer you more help temporarily when you need it? Why isn't mental illness taken more seriously? Why should you have to struggle so much? Why should some filthy rich people and companies be getting a leg up when someone like you probably would be happy with just a tiny bit more help when you need it? It just doesn't seem fair to me.

 

[Mr Invisible]

Why does it have to be this way? In a country as well off as Australia why can't we offer you more help temporarily when you need it? Why isn't mental illness taken more seriously? Why should you have to struggle so much? Why should some filthy rich people and companies be getting a leg up when someone like you probably would be happy with just a tiny bit more help when you need it? It just doesn't seem fair to me.

I totally agree with that. That's why I welcome these new tax cuts.

It's also why I believe our welfare system needs to change.

There will always be people that have disabilites that prevent them from working, always be young people needing a boost in early life, and always be those that need a bit of help along the way.

If we cut back on those that should be working, and on overseas aid, we could put more money into helping our own. Most people want to work, but when you're made redundant there will always be periods where you need to reassess and get back on your feet.

Hence I'd like to see a system perhaps whereby when out of work anyone who is a lower income earner (can prove they have say less than $20k in the bank, and earn combined under $100k a year) can apply for concessions. Those concessions are 100% tax paid returned in their last financial year of work, rental assistance of $100 or more a week, reduced (or subsidised registration and insurance), and reduced (or subsidised heavily) training courses to allow people to reskill in another area/trade.

That would at least allow people to focus on the essentials without the financial stress heaping more pressure on them.

I'd also like to see more housing built by the government for anyone from normal renters to the homeless. I'm sure there are homeless out there that have just lost their way and gone so far downhill in life that they just need a pick me up and to get back on their feet. As people get back on their feet the government charge them rent up to a capped rate, and everyones happy.

...

Australia needs to shut the borders and stop taking in refugees, and turn the spotlight back on helping our own people. More people in homes and off the street, more people working instead of taking advantage of handouts, and our economy would actually start lifting.

Use Australian companies to build government housing, providing jobs along the way for tradies. Once those on welfare/homeless move in and start getting a job and earning a wage, that'll go back to the economy as well.

The country isn't far off being able to truly loook after our own, and if done right could boost Australia quite a bit, whilst improving everything the lowest social demographics.

 

[Flanagun]

The elaboration takes about 20 books worth of economic discussion but basically put, Liberals policies lead to less money for lower economics leading to a larger gap between rich and poor. Labor's policies lead to larger business being forced off shore along with long term economic damage through things like climate policy and high level tax.

Don't get me wrong though. What Labor was planning was absolutely needed as we're at a point where we can either destroy the economy or the environment. But Labor's policies destroy the economy while Liberals destroy the environment.

Yeah, I get that basic argument.... but I don’t think it’s always so black and white.... there are many economists who applauded Wayne Swan’s measures during the GFC and Australia got through the whole thing pretty well in comparison to other major economies around the world. There are economists who argue strongly against trickle down economics....too.... if trickle down worked so well, the US wouldn’t rely so heavily on other countries’ oil resources... lol

I don’t think either party is really going to be good for the economy if left to govern too long.... Labor can’t just keep taxing corporations or they will go offshore, but the
Liberals also can’t afford to cut too many sercices, or eventually there will be nothing left. I’m
Not convinced their strategies are sustainable from a long term POV either if labor isn’t around to fund more projects they can eventually return to power and cut from. If the Libs are left to their devices too long, we’ll get to the point of being like the US, where there is little left to trim from.

I think after six years of coalition cuts, we’d be better off raising taxes a little for the top end of town... certainly from a quality of living POV and possibly even from an economic one (in the long term)....

We are definitely in agreement the environment is a bigger concern at the moment. The economy is important, but a strong economy counts for little if a large chunk of the population has little to no quality of life, or even worse- the planet becomes uninhabitable.

 

[Flanagun]

Just trying to cast my mind back to the last election that the ALP got in, I don't remember this whole "doomsday prophecies" and "the world is going to end" approach.

I'm wondering if voters were also concerned that if ALP got in, the floodgates would open with boat arrivals again.


Policies and economics don't just rely on local resources. They also rely heavily on the world markets.

Lets say Australian steel is a resource in Australia that brings in 40% of the countries revenue, and coal another 40%. So 80% of the countries revenue is from two resources. The USA and England buy 100% of the resources that we export.

China suddenly pop up "hey guyz.. we can offer coal and steel at same quantities, but 80% less cost than Australia".
USA/England "Wow okay we'll now buy 50% of our steel and coal from China at a cheaper rate.

Australia then loses 50% of the 80% of it's revenue from coal and steel, simply because another player in the market has bottomed out their resource prices.

That's not the ALP or LNP's fault, its just shifting world markets and economics.


Newstart cuts off (reduces to $0 payout) when a partnership earns more than $980 a fortnight ($490 per week). Wifey pulls in ~$800-$1000 a week (depending on overtime, days of work, and tips). We pay $600 per week in rent alone, leaving us $200-$400 per week odd. From that comes private health cover, electricity bills (partial), water bills (partial), gas bills (partial), monthly phone and internet bills, NRMA membership (monthly), pet insurance (monthly), dog food, petrol, parking passes for her work (monthly), and our groceries.

Add to that me dealing with / working on building myself (psychologically) back up from a mental illness brought back by previous employer, looking at a complete career shift with no idea what I want to do next, and living off savings .. as you can probably guess... things are definitely tight.

Rental assistance or even something small would be nice, and mental health isn't deemed a disability unless it's lifetime and major.

When I reference welfare as "dole bludgers", I refer to those who sit around all day with zero intention of ever working, yet are perfectly able to. They choose not too because tax payers are paying their way. If they were working and contributing to the economy it would mean less government handouts required, meaning there could be more there for those that genuinely need it or fall on tough times and need a little help.

LNP have already brought in tax cuts that people will see in the current financial year meaning people earning up to $126,000 will get $1,080 back at tax time. That means myself and my wife should get something back (having bother worked in the past financial year).

They are talking about calling in parliament ASAP and getting stage 2 of the rebates pushed through before July 1 deadline, lowering tax brackets again.

Good article here talks about "what next" based on their policies.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05...t-now-for-scott-morrisons-government/11128158

There is a fair bit of scientific consensus to back up these end of days arguments though... it’s not as if it’s just bitter lefties making shit up... the threat is very real.

 

[deimus]

I totally agree with that. That's why I welcome these new tax cuts.

It's also why I believe our welfare system needs to change.

There will always be people that have disabilites that prevent them from working, always be young people needing a boost in early life, and always be those that need a bit of help along the way.

If we cut back on those that should be working, and on overseas aid, we could put more money into helping our own. Most people want to work, but when you're made redundant there will always be periods where you need to reassess and get back on your feet.

Hence I'd like to see a system perhaps whereby when out of work anyone who is a lower income earner (can prove they have say less than $20k in the bank, and earn combined under $100k a year) can apply for concessions. Those concessions are 100% tax paid returned in their last financial year of work, rental assistance of $100 or more a week, reduced (or subsidised registration and insurance), and reduced (or subsidised heavily) training courses to allow people to reskill in another area/trade.

That would at least allow people to focus on the essentials without the financial stress heaping more pressure on them.

I'd also like to see more housing built by the government for anyone from normal renters to the homeless. I'm sure there are homeless out there that have just lost their way and gone so far downhill in life that they just need a pick me up and to get back on their feet. As people get back on their feet the government charge them rent up to a capped rate, and everyones happy.

...

Australia needs to shut the borders and stop taking in refugees, and turn the spotlight back on helping our own people. More people in homes and off the street, more people working instead of taking advantage of handouts, and our economy would actually start lifting.

Use Australian companies to build government housing, providing jobs along the way for tradies. Once those on welfare/homeless move in and start getting a job and earning a wage, that'll go back to the economy as well.

The country isn't far off being able to truly loook after our own, and if done right could boost Australia quite a bit, whilst improving everything the lowest social demographics.

Unfortunately there won't be much thought put into any of the theories you put forward. Foreign aid is not just handed out without thought. Strategic and military concerns are considered when politicians hand over money. I don't believe turning away genuine refugees is really what's best for our national identity. I think we just need to distribute the wealth the country has a little more fairly.

 

[CaptainJackson]

Why suddenly because the LNP got in are mass jobs going to be lost? ALP supporters scaremongering at it's finest... it's that sort of rubbish which got them nuked in this election.

I find it funny because of all this Chicken Little "the sky is falling" doom and gloom BS by pathetic ALP supporters who are having a massive ragequit/cry because their party didn't get voted in.

I just want to understand this. Actual economic indicators (such as our highest debt levels, 15% drop in house prices, 2 quarters of per capita recession, unemployment growing in those same 2 quarters) are scare campaigns but slogans, no costings before an election, labors death tax is coming to get you arent scare campaigns?

Ok good.

I should also point out that Labor's policies would most likely lead to long term economic issues but that's another thing altogether.

Negative gearing changes were investigated by the grattan institute and found they would have little to no effect on house prices.

Negative gearing was still open to people, only on new properties and any negative geared properties that were owned before july 2020 would remain as negatively geared.

Re introducing penalty rates, where we were initially scare campaigned into businesses doing it tough and that it would create jobs actually resulted in no new jobs being created and a drop in activity in the retail sector.

Franking credits where the tax payer was topping up inheritance funds and coming at a cost of $8 billion to the taxpayer. Superannuation was created to live off in retirement not created as an investment fund.

Targetting global corporations for their tax loop holes which many economists claimed labors policy was too soft and that it didnt actually bring in much. Yeh that was sure going to scare off those global corporations

But do go on and tell me more how labors long term policies were going to screw us.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Yeah, I get that basic argument.... but I don’t think it’s always so black and white.... there are many economists who applauded Wayne Swan’s measures during the GFC and Australia got through the whole thing pretty well in comparison to other major economies around the world. There are economists who argue strongly against trickle down economics....too.... if trickle down worked so well, the US wouldn’t rely so heavily on other countries’ oil resources... lol

I don’t think either party is really going to be good for the economy if left to govern too long.... Labor can’t just keep taxing corporations or they will go offshore, but the
Liberals also can’t afford to cut too many sercices, or eventually there will be nothing left. I’m
Not convinced their strategies are sustainable from a long term POV either if labor isn’t around to fund more projects they can eventually return to power and cut from. If the Libs are left to their devices too long, we’ll get to the point of being like the US, where there is little left to trim from.

I think after six years of coalition cuts, we’d be better off raising taxes a little for the top end of town... certainly from a quality of living POV and possibly even from an economic one (in the long term)....

We are definitely in agreement the environment is a bigger concern at the moment. The economy is important, but a strong economy counts for little if a large chunk of the population has little to no quality of life, or even worse- the planet becomes uninhabitable.

I agree. There's realistically no way to tell for sure when it comes to non-implemented economic policies but I think every economist will argue that Labor's policies will cause economic damage. But as I said, it's needed and there's nothing to say that Liberals policies won't also cause some economic damage.

I should also point out that no economist supports or opposes trickle down theory 'cause it doesn't exist. It's a straw man that was created to debate against supply side economics. More specifically, I comedian created the term to pick on Ronald Reagan's economic policies (Reaganomics) and his opposition ran with it. But even Reaganomics doesn't call for tax reductions on the rich only. It calls for tax reduction for all. They can up with the name "tickle down theory" but it doesn't actually exist as an economic theory.

The closest one to it is supply side economic theory. The difference being that supply side economics calls for a reduction in tax for everyone rather than just the rich.

This is the opposite of demand side economics which calls for more spending rather than reductions in tax.

This makes it funnier when someone suggests reducing tax on the rich and not the poor, 'cause no economist supports that.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

I just want to understand this. Actual economic indicators (such as our highest debt levels, 15% drop in house prices, 2 quarters of per capita recession, unemployment growing in those same 2 quarters) are scare campaigns but slogans, no costings before an election, labors death tax is coming to get you arent scare campaigns?

Ok good.



Negative gearing changes were investigated by the grattan institute and found they would have little to no effect on house prices.

Negative gearing was still open to people, only on new properties and any negative geared properties that were owned before july 2020 would remain as negatively geared.

Re introducing penalty rates, where we were initially scare campaigned into businesses doing it tough and that it would create jobs actually resulted in no new jobs being created and a drop in activity in the retail sector.

Franking credits where the tax payer was topping up inheritance funds and coming at a cost of $8 billion to the taxpayer. Superannuation was created to live off in retirement not created as an investment fund.

Targetting global corporations for their tax loop holes which many economists claimed labors policy was too soft and that it didnt actually bring in much. Yeh that was sure going to scare off those global corporations

But do go on and tell me more how labors long term policies were going to screw us.

Climate policies mainly. Even Marxist economists would argue that Labor's climate policies would lead to an economic drop due to investment in a non-returnable/low investment technology.

But the drop wouldn't be huge as the policies were a little soft.

Couple this with the higher education spending (from child care to tafe fee reduction/removal), increase cost for businesses of all levels (penalty rates, increased regulation on workers, closing tax loop holes making it more expensive to operate in Australia), just to name a few.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Labor's policies are a bad thing. They're needed to balance the economy and protect the environment. I'm just pointing out that there would be some economic fallout. More than Liberals "do nothing" policies.

 

[Mr Invisible]

Gees I hope the ALP MPs can tell them apart.

Almost look like twins!