Jump to content
Rocket Salad

The Politics Thread

Recommended Posts

No, definitely last.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Limited said:

I got one too. I couldn't believe it. Are they trying to piss people off?

 

I actually wonder if he even realises he is?  He must though.  This latest one has to be in response to the furore about his previous one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Clive wants to waste his money sending me text messages then he's more than welcome to.  I'd prefer he used it to pay some of the workers entitlements he dodged but I suspect that wouldn't be his second option anyway.

The joke's on him anyway.  Even if his party does get a couple of seats the next parliament is likely to be so fragmented that they'll have no bargaining power anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clive seems like the Aussie version of Trump to me (though thankfully he's not in power).  A strategy based on cliches which appeal to the simple-minded, and has made his way in the world by being a big-mouth bulldozing bully with a trail of corpses in his wake, but no real intelligence, integrity or morals.  He couldn't give a f*ck about the average person on the street.

His policy about having businesses pay tax annually instead of quarterly -  he claims it will boost the economy and jobs.  How the f*ck does that work?  Regardless, the Govt still get the same amount of tax revenue?  I think it would actually send more businesses to the wall because some (many) can't budget well enough to ensure they put the money aside for a full 12mths.  Paying smaller amounts quarterly is less risky.  Cash-flow problems are what send most businesses down the crapper.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our business is tiny (like, really tiny), and years ago we switched to doing our tax/gst etc monthly, as it's easier to come up with.  I know they all say have that separate account and put the GST into that account religiously and don't touch it.  But when you're scrambling and income can be volatile, it's easy to dip into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, goughy said:

Our business is tiny (like, really tiny), and years ago we switched to doing our tax/gst etc monthly, as it's easier to come up with.  I know they all say have that separate account and put the GST into that account religiously and don't touch it.  But when you're scrambling and income can be volatile, it's easy to dip into it.

Exactly Goughy

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, ComfortablyNumb said:

His policy about having businesses pay tax annually instead of quarterly -  he claims it will boost the economy and jobs.  How the f*ck does that work?  Regardless, the Govt still get the same amount of tax revenue?  I think it would actually send more businesses to the wall because some (many) can't budget well enough to ensure they put the money aside for a full 12mths.  Paying smaller amounts quarterly is less risky.  Cash-flow problems are what send most businesses down the crapper.

Use of funds - the basis of the financial system

If you wait until the end of the year to pay your tax the money can be invested by you for additional return.  Likewise, the government getting it later is an opportunity cost to them because they can't use that money to pay their debts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

Use of funds - the basis of the financial system

If you wait until the end of the year to pay your tax the money can be invested by you for additional return.  Likewise, the government getting it later is an opportunity cost to them because they can't use that money to pay their debts

OK, good point.  Though I guess that creates another problem, if the funds are re-invested in tax deductible items, the tax take overall is reduced, which produces budget problems for the govt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ComfortablyNumb said:

OK, good point.  Though I guess that creates another problem, if the funds are re-invested in tax deductible items, the tax take overall is reduced, which produces budget problems for the govt.

True.  The idea is though, that businesses investing that money provides additional economic growth, which ultimately helps the budget

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know nothing about marketing but an extremely experienced and successful marketing director I train with told me Clive's recent text campaign was sheer genius and has exceeded all expectations.      

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Mike Del said:

I know nothing about marketing but an extremely experienced and successful marketing director I train with told me Clive's recent text campaign was sheer genius and has exceeded all expectations.      

Well, nobody is talking about David Leyonhjelm today I guess...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The trickle of Libs and Nats jumping ship to get cushy public sector and resource industry jobs rather then face the upcoming election massacre will become a flood soon I guess.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And aren't the nats talking about running in some seats against the libs??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could the lnp have cost themselves Gilmore at the next election?  I'm guessing it might have been hard to hold anyway, which would be why ScoMo placed someone with a public profile in there???  But with the other side note standing as an independent and some pissed off liberal party members in the area, is the LNP vote gonna now splinter between the two of them?

If MT was too Labor for the LNP, you'd have thought a former president of the ALP would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, goughy said:

Could the lnp have cost themselves Gilmore at the next election? 

As one of the commentators said yesterday, the libs seem to take their right foot out of their mouths and then replace it with their left foots....

for gods sake, just throw Shortpantz the keys to the lodge now and we can all go home and i can go straight to the grieving stage...

 

Edited by Prince
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Andrew #1 said:

Mundine would have to be the only rat prepared to jump onto a sinking ship ...

There's an inconvenient truth buried in there (in a very shallow grave, with a few limbs sticking out) but someone will pull the race card on me if I mention the war 😁.

Hope it backfires on them like a 72 Vee Dub.

Really just proves there are zero degrees of separation between the parties now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/01/2019 at 1:27 PM, Pete said:

The handouts were part of a two pronged attack on the effects of the GFC, one being  financial stability measures (lowering interest rates and supporting the banks) and the second being a 2 part financial stimulus package.

The first of these was $10.4 billion (which for Australia is around 1 per cent of GDP.)  comprised of $8.7 billion that would flow to pensioners and low-income families in the form of cash bonuses, $1.5 billion to support housing construction, and $187 million for new training places.

The second was a $42 billion stimulus package titled the Nation Building and Jobs Plan predominantly centered on fast tracking infrastructure projects.

Australia's handling of the GFC was considered to be very good financial management (not some loony left free-for-all hand-out) and we got through it far better than the major players UK and USA.

This is of course under the assumption that we needed it....... and we didn’t!

And...... just read what Stikman wrote above.  Correct-a-Mondo!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, IronmanFoz said:

This is of course under the assumption that we needed it....... and we didn’t!

And...... just read what Stikman wrote above.  Correct-a-Mondo!

Except Stikman is wrong. There was a massive gap in both time (about 1 year) and in diversity of impact between the benefits of China’s own stimulus package starting and the effects being felt beneficially in Australia. Doncha did an analysis - providing links to the relevant studies on the issue - about 150 pages ago in this very thread. I couldn’t be arsed repeating that exercise, save to point out that the trades and allied employment in the cities on the eastern seaboard were facing mass redundancies and had no real chance of picking up the windfall of China’s increased demand for resources to fuel its construction stimulus. It may have been different in mineral rich WA, but even there there was a 1 year lag. ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real purpose of the $42 billion 'Nation building package' (i.e. replacing perfectly adequate school halls) was propping up the construction industry

Which props up the CFMEU

Which props up the Labor party

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Andrew #1 said:

Except Stikman is wrong. . Doncha did an analysis - providing links to the relevant studies on the issue - 

No disrespect but any idiot cut put a link into a thread to back up a claim - even me! Plus the investment bank I worked for also benefited from the GFC and said Australia didn’t need stimulus. 

Anyhow.... here’s a link and then pasted in full:

http://www.taxpayers.org.au/factcheck_did_kevin_save_us_from_the_gfc

There are many lies being spread this election season, but none more galling than the claim by Prime Minister Rudd that he "saved" us from the Global Financial Crisis.

Sadly, it seems many Australians still believe that Kevin throwing $80 billion dollars away, and spending us deep into debt, was a good thing. To combat this, we have prepared a short fact sheet detailing the myths and facts about the so-called stimulus.

Every point is researched meticulously, supported by hard data, and has been fact checked by a number of professional economists. I would encourage you to forward this to all your contacts, as we must get the truth out.

Here are the myths and here are the facts:

MYTH: Australia only escaped the “Global Financial Crisis” because of Kevin Rudd

FACT: Australia’s escaped relatively unscathed from the so-called “Global Financial Crisis” due to the legacy of the Howard Government leaving strong budget surpluses and eliminating the debt - Australia had no net debt federally, and, according to the IMF, some of the lowest gross debt in the world. Furthermore, the Howard government's reforms to industrial relations ensured a flexible labour market and increase productivity. This – combined with some prudent monetary policy (the lowering of relatively-high interest rates by the Reserve Bank giving Australians a higher disposable income, thereby boosting consumption)  and the strength of Australian banks – is what spared us.

MYTH: Government Spending can stimulate an economy

FACT: Academic research overwhelmingly finds that the exact opposite is true: government spending makes a poor economy worse. There has been no case in history where a country has spent itself out of a recession. Here’s a great 3 minute video summarising why.  Dr Julie Novak found that  in Australia, “an increase in government size by ten percentage points is associated with a lower annual GDP per capita growth rate of between 1.2 and 2.5 percentage points”.  Empirical evidence proves that the only way to boost an economy is through tax cuts – instead, Kevin Rudd did the exact opposite

MYTH: Countries who cut spending did worse between 2008-2013 than those who increased spending

FACT: In every country where governments cut spending, the economy started to boomEstonia is a good example of this,  and even  , Sweden – the darling country of the left! - slashed spending which resulted in an “economic miracle”. Other examples are numerous.

The facts speak for themselves:

Stimulus_Data.jpg
MYTH: The Stimulus helped save and create jobs

FACT: Labor’s cooked the books! There are now 350,000 people receiving unemployment benefits who are classified as “non-jobseekers”, meaning they are not required to work and don’t come up in the unemployment figures. In fact, a conservative estimate by the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows that the number of people without jobs went up by 222,000 between December 2007 and July 2013! Treasury didn’t even bother to do proper modeling, but a peer review paper by John Humphreys, our Deputy Director, has shown that even using the Treasury’s own approach, the stimulus directly cost 30,000 jobs. To make matters worse, productivity also has plummeted under the Labor Government due to their winding back our industrial relations system back to the 1960's.

MYTH: The Stimulus Boosted Consumption

FACT: Detailed academic analysis has shown that Kevin Rudd’s “Stimulus: had – NO effect household non-durable consumption. None.  In fact, even the Australian Treasury found that Kevin Rudd’s $900 cheques  equaled only $1 of economic activity – that’s right, $1.

MYTH: The alternatives [to the stimulus packages] were to do nothing or, worse, effectively replicate the Premiers' Plan of 1931 when governments cut expenditure, thereby compounding the problems created by a private sector already in retreat. The result, of course, was an economic rout, appalling unemployment and a decade of negligible growth through the 1930s” – Kevin Rudd, 2009

FACT: Despite what our left-wing high school syllabuses may say, it is a matter of historical fact that the Premier’s Plan was a success – and saved Australia. I know this is difficult for many people to accept - so steeped is the left wing myth in our culture - but the facts speak for themselves. In the United States, where President Hoover and then FDR increased spending, and the economy went into a tailspin, after the premier’s plan, the Australian economy sharply recovered: GDP went up, and unemployment started to rapidly fall. No wonder that in the United States Henry Morgenthau  – FDR’s very own Treasury admitted “we have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. . . . I say, after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started . . . and an enormous debt to boot.” Even the icon of the left, Lord Maynard Keynes, admitted that “the Premiers’ Plan saved the economic structure of Australia”

MYTH: The stimulus packages – which totaled a staggering $79.1 billion – were well spent. 

FACT: Can anyone really claim that ‘home insulation’ can restart an economy? Or that tearing down one school hall to build another boosts productivity? Examples of waste are endless: An outback school with one student is among nine tiny schools handed $2.25 million in federal grants to build new halls, libraries and classrooms, even though they face closure. Mulgildie State School west of Bundaberg received $250,000 to build a basic 60sq m shed, after receiving a $29,000 quote from a local shed builder for a similar structure. An undercover playground with concrete floors and no doors costs $1.8 million under the Rudd Government’s schools stimulus funding,

MYTH: Labor is a “low taxing” government

FACT: Labor has increased taxes a staggering forty three times. That's right - forty three. Should we all be paying the price for their mistakes?

We are a non-partisan taxpayer advocacy group, and I will never dream of intending to influence your vote, but on this particular matter, the facts speak for themselves.

Kevin Rudd's policies - according to every serious expert - were destructive, damaging, and are destroying our economy. They didn't "save" our economy - instead, they took us to the bring of ruin.

This saturday, let's make sure everyone is aware of the facts.

UPDATE: As you might know, we run an intensive economic education program for students to counter the left-wing indoctrination they receive at universities. For more detail on the points outlined in this email, I would encourage you to read a recent presentation made by Professor Sinclair Davidson from RMIT that you can download HERE

UPDATE 2: I neglected to mention one other relevant Myth. Treasury claimed in a graph that was widely circulated that an OECD analysis showed Australia's stimulus worked. The problem with this is - they fudged the numbers, and specifically excluded a number of countries just to make the data fit their claim. The full dataset showed the stimulus had no statistically significant effect. They were later forced to withdraw the graph. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Economists are wrong about nearly everything, mainly due to using models and techniques that are a poor fit for the problems they are trying to analyse and solve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BarryBevan said:

Economists are wrong about nearly everything, mainly due to using models and techniques that are a poor fit for the problems they are trying to analyse and solve

And yet we are supposed to trust climate scientists who have historically been wrong about nearly everything mainly due to using models and techniques that are a poor fit for the problems they are trying to analyse and solve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

And yet we are supposed to trust climate scientists who have historically been wrong about nearly everything mainly due to using models and techniques that are a poor fit for the problems they are trying to analyse and solve

Do you agree humans have changed the climate?

Anyway I was ragging on the trusted economists who said 2008 would be a bull market year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

Do you agree humans have changed the climate?

Probably 

I'm guessing that we will disagree on the extent though 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

The real purpose of the $42 billion 'Nation building package' (i.e. replacing perfectly adequate school halls) was propping up the construction industry

Which props up the CFMEU

Which props up the Labor party

In most cases, there were no school halls in existence. Those that were simply were not adequate. You’d know that if you had kids going to public school. Amuch better spend of public money than Howard’s ‘school halls’ program which saw Kings and Scots able to upgrade their Italinate elephant palaces and boating sheds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus the investment bank I worked for also benefited from the GFC and said Australia didn’t need stimulus.l

 IronmanFoz - I really need to arrange for you to go on a date with the great Vasily Blokhin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, IronmanFoz said:

No disrespect but any idiot cut put a link into a thread to back up a claim - even me! P

Indeed. You are that idiot:  Drawing deep from the IPA and other shills of the overdog.

Sinclair Davidson? When he’s not shilling for the IPA, he’s shilling for big tobacco. 

If we are going to do a cut and paste war - I’ll see you and raise you:

https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/labors-gfc-legacy-misrepresented-by-falsehoods-fast-and-furious-part-1a,9683

https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/labors-gfc-legacy-part-2-what-was-really-achieved,9698

https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/labors-gfc-legacy-the-verdict-of-history-part-3-and-conclusion,9705

https://www.crikey.com.au/2017/11/02/ten-years-on-from-the-stockmarket-peak-were-in-a-different-world/

https://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2016/jun/30/labors-stimulus-package-got-us-through-a-crisis-turnbull-saying-otherwise-is-silly

Edited by Andrew #1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Facts are not disproved just because they have been quoted by the ATA lads

And name calling has never been a terribly convincing method of debate Andrew

Edited by IronJimbo
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, BarryBevan said:

Do you agree humans have changed the climate?

Anyway I was ragging on the trusted economists who said 2008 would be a bull market year

The thing I don't get is the climate has been in a state of charge since day dot. We have been through a heap of ice ages, so why now all of a sudden do they think the climate needs to remain fixed?

Either way I think they are selling the message wrong. They should be saying whether we are or aren't impacting climate change we should be eliminating fossil fuels to keep all the shit out of the air so that our kids can breath nice fresh in polluted air..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IronJimbo said:

Facts are not disproved just because they have been quoted by the ATA lads

And name calling has never been a terribly convincing method of debate Andrew

I debate professionally with experts. Name calling with idiots saves time.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Andrew #1 said:

I debate professionally with experts

Given how often you resort to intellectual dishonesty, you don't seem to be very good at it

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IronJimbo said:

Given how often you resort to intellectual dishonesty, you don't seem to be very good at it

Yeah. Piss poor. 90%+ conviction rate when I prosecute. 80% win rate in civil and industrial litigation I run. 80% acquittals when I defend. Hopeless.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

Redefining the word 'debate' does not make you a good debater

Runner up at the Australasian University Debating Championships; finalist - World Debating Championship, Princeton University.

How do you like those apples?

Edited by Andrew #1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

Most impressive 

When did you forget how to do it properly? 

I haven’t. The problem is that you are a drone with a confirmation bias problem.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

lol @ 'professional debater'

You argue for a living and lie for a hobby...

Some would uncharitably say it’s the other way round ;)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously dudes, chill with all the personal shit eh.  Every single one of us can find something to legitimately support our opinions and beliefs, and whether we agree or disagree with each other doesn't matter.  We can have a lively debate without it reaching to the gutter.  I mean, hell, I bet I can find evidence proving flat earth theory.  Doesn't mean I believe it.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, goughy said:

Seriously dudes, chill with all the personal shit eh.  Every single one of us can find something to legitimately support our opinions and beliefs, and whether we agree or disagree with each other doesn't matter.  We can have a lively debate without it reaching to the gutter.  I mean, hell, I bet I can find evidence proving flat earth theory.  Doesn't mean I believe it.  

Piss off 😜

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may not agree with very much you say IJ, but you know I luv ya.  I'll take that as a compliment :)

 

Some more ministers announce they're leaving the sinking ship....

Have any Labor pollies announced they're retiring at the next election?  Or independents?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

lol @ 'professional debater'

You argue for a living and lie for a hobby...

He's a master debater...

You could say he's a master bater lol😁

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Andrew #1 said:

Someone call ‘more’ and ambulance ... 

C'mon it was pretty funny, lighten up 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

Probably 

I'm guessing that we will disagree on the extent though 

I admit to not knowing the extent. I think we should try to have a positive effect on the planet. Agree that if the US China and India keep pumping out tonnes of emissions then our changes have little to no effect.

Challenges is to how to change the big emitters, don't know

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...