Goon...you did not answer the questions ! BTW he would have to pay Capital Gains Tax on any properties that would have been sold.Quote:
Originally Posted by HiredGoon
Printable View
Goon...you did not answer the questions ! BTW he would have to pay Capital Gains Tax on any properties that would have been sold.Quote:
Originally Posted by HiredGoon
One family = one home. When one family starts buying 2, 3, 4 houses and sells them on to gain profits, *that's* immoral. Because then, it means they have taken up housing supply from 2, 3, 4 other families, who will now have to pay more to let that 1 family profit before they can have their homes.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingwally
They can make a profit reselling classic cars, people wouldn't care. But when it's houses, that really hits a nerve.
EDIT: And I'm not making the point that anyone who flips houses for profits is bad. The point is for Dutton to have been so active in doing that, for him to then become PM right when the country is facing it's biggest housing crisis ever is a HUGE problem no matter what way you look at it.
Dumbest thought process going and it’s persisted for generations. There’s approx 820k unemployed in the this country - including those on youth allowance. That means, per working Australian we support 0.05 unemployed person - or 1 person per 17 working people. As a sole person, you are barely burdened by this.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingwally
This excuse serves as nothing more as a classist grudge and a reason to be angry. It’s such pissweak reasoning
No one is financially burdened by this in any way at all. All high-power money is created by fiat, so taxes don't 'fund' anything at the federal level. However, there is an economic cost, as a single day's unemployment is a single day's productivity lost for ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by fnmfnmfnm
I think a better idea, rather than just giving people benefit, would be to offer a minimum wage (which should be set above the poverty threshold) job doing any public good, paid for federally but managed locally, to anyone who wants/needs one. Everyone would benefit, and if you're able to work but choose not to... then it's your choice not to receive anything.
Totally agree with you KW. There will be another drop in living standards over the next three years.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingwally
What does 'drop in living standards' actually mean in this context?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vader
Good idea for the most part. Obviously there a people who actually can't work so maybe that's a different category. And yes the whole "my taxes" being spent on the poor argument is a bullshit thing constructed by neo-liberalists. It's called "social security" for a reason. There will always be a certain amount of unemployment and big companies do not actually want full employment because then they have to pay higher wages. Can you imagine the crime rate if social security was severely cut? There's all sorts of reasons for poverty but "they're just lazy" is not really one of them. I'd rather spend "my" taxes on social security than excessive funding for rich private schools (fun fact: The Kings School has 17 playing fields) but you don't hear much about that compared to "dole bludgers".Quote:
Originally Posted by fted
Anyway, it seems like Australia is still a decent place and the majority of the population have rejected the LNP's divisive bullshit and given them their worst result in history for now.
Amen
Meet you back here in three years? I'll set an alarm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vader
But yeah first we have to agree on what constitutes a "drop in living standards" and also what aspects of the economy government can and can't control.
"Do you "feel" better of now than three years ago?" is not an any way a reliable statistic because the answer for almost everyone will always be no."
5/5/2028!
Also, fuck we really need to extend federal terms to 4 years.
Ross Gittins on the money as usual. You can only blame a government for so much.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-...ILkNtBhzPWfFhg
Read it with https://12ft.io/
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiredGoon
Even Coorey, one of the biggest LNP media cheerleaders, admitted Labor will probably serve at least two more terms after this such is the state of the LNP. Teals and Indies will keep eating into LNP heartland.
They need to move more to the centre or they’ll be history. Their base of older people is dying off and anyone 50 or below can see how pathetic the LNP leadership is. Massive reset needed. They’re a rural party now with virtually bugger all City seats throughout the country.
In any case I’m in the greater south west and don’t see any drop in living standards. Just a massive media beat up that cookers cling onto. New generations don’t want to sacrifice and expect everything now. That’s the problem.
Australia is not alone. Take a look at the results in Canada:Quote:
Originally Posted by HiredGoon
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crkx3gdvv75o
The common theme appears to be a general rejection of right-wing parties thanks to the bad example being set by Trump. I'd guess that many who would've voted LNP here or Conservatives in Canada, would've looked at what Trump has done in the USA and thought "is that what we're gonna get?".
The gen z/millennial vote is also 40% of the vote now. More than baby boomers.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldfishMan