Talking Politics

[Sintiger]

You don't think removing franking credits from pensioners was unpopular? You don't think scrapping negative gearing on ALL properties was unpopular?

Therein lies the problem because neither of these things were the Labor policy
The policy on franking credits was to take away cash refunds for franking credits to bring it back to its original intention when it was introduced in the late 1980s to have dividends taxed at a minimum level of the company tax rate and a maximum of no more than the recipient’s marginal tax rate.
Negative gearing was to be scrapped on new properties with all current arrangements grandfathered .

 

[Baloo]

What I find strange is there is so much angst around Scomo in this country, this should have been such an easy election to win, so why isn't it? Why are the ALP not shown to be winning in a landslide? Why has Scomo repeatedly been shown to be either neck and neck or ahead of Albo in many polls for preferred leader.

Media. News Limited and Fairfax are now run by people who have a vested interest in the current government staying in power. Between News Ltd & Fairfax, that is the vast majority of what the population use as their main source of news.

You just have to scroll back on this thread to see the comments of "They are both the same", "There's no difference", "Albo gaffe'd again" from posters. When really it should be "Scumo is scared of an ICAC with teeth", "Government completely *smile* up national security", "Government has had a 5 year policy to stagnate wage growth". but the MSM are parroting the Governments sound bites. Christ, I reckon the MSM might even be advising the government on what soundbites work best.

If people had the time and inclination to dig deeper, past the MSM, a clearer picture appears.

The media should be focused attacking the Government, not the Opposition, no matter which party is in power.

 

[eZyT]

Media. News Limited and Fairfax are now run by people who have a vested interest in the current government staying in power. Between News Ltd & Fairfax, that is the vast majority of what the population use as their main source of news.

You just have to scroll back on this thread to see the comments of "They are both the same", "There's no difference", "Albo gaffe'd again" from posters. When really it should be "Scumo is scared of an ICAC with teeth", "Government completely *smile* up national security", "Government has had a 5 year policy to stagnate wage growth". but the MSM are parroting the Governments sound bites. Christ, I reckon the MSM might even be advising the government on what soundbites work best.

If people had the time and inclination to dig deeper, past the MSM, a clearer picture appears.

The media should be focused attacking the Government, not the Opposition, no matter which party is in power.

if 'politics is showbiz for ugly people'

then,

'SkyNews is showbiz for ugly black hearted psycho simplistic *smile* who were too ugly, even for politics'

The joint is a kind of telecast cerebral abattoir killing floor

Murdoch collects intellectual and moral human puss like someone collects smurfs

People like Credlin and Bernardi (its gone so psycho, Bolt has found himself the relative voice of reason),

are dreadful, hateful, conniving, deluded, manipulative, disgusting humans.

I genuinely feel sorry for their families. Actually anyone who has to go within 100m of them, ever.

 

[mrposhman]

Therein lies the problem because neither of these things were the Labor policy
The policy on franking credits was to take away cash refunds for franking credits to bring it back to its original intention when it was introduced in the late 1980s to have dividends taxed at a minimum level of the company tax rate and no more than the recipient’s marginal tax rate.
Negative gearing was to be scrapped on new properties with all current arrangements grandfathered .

I was being a bit facetious with my comment. I remembered what the franking credits issue was. It mainly affecting retirees. I understand the reasons for it, but with cost of living movements and reducing state pensions, this changed the goalposts for many retirees who were banking on this to top up their pension. Whilst it was a plicy that was trying to do the right thing, it was a late addition to the agenda and was poorly thought out.

I'll admit I'd forgotten about what their actual policy on negative gearing was, I knew they took it away in full but forgot the bit about new properties being exempt, but even then, this was poorly thought out. The reasons for negative gearing are actually not a negative to the economy. Providing the ability for one to grow their wealth would utlimately result in a lowering of the state to provide fund either income support payments or state pensions later in life as wealth grows. The problem negative gearing created was, when it was implemented, it wasn't thought that people would use this to finance their significant property portfolios. 1 or maybe 2 properties aren't the issue. Its when people build entire portfolios, partly funded through reducing their taxes. The issue can be easily solved by capping the deductions that can be made as either of a % of your taxable income (again with an overall cap) or just setting a flat amount. Lets say that was $25k. Any losses made above that sum would be carried forward to when you sell the property as opposed to being treated as tax deductions immediately for a property you may not sell for 20-30 years. Deferred access to those tax benefits would have the desired result without stopping your everyday Aussie from purchasing an investment property.

Labor focusing on negative gearing on new properties was I think I remember designed to help first home buyers, yet a lot of first home buyers were being pushed into purchasing a new home rather than established due to the lower price and when many could stay with a parent through the building process. I bought my 1st house this way, and I know of many others that have done something similar. It was poorly thought out as it would have done the opposite of what it was designed for.

 

[larabee]

An article describing some differences between the two major parties for those that think they're all the same:

Undecided? Jaded with Australia’s major parties? Here are five stark differences between them this election | Paul Daley

I dedicate little attention to the daily campaign grind – but the contrasts between Labor and the Coalition are black and white

www.theguardian.com

 

[Sintiger]

I was being a bit facetious with my comment. I remembered what the franking credits issue was. It mainly affecting retirees. I understand the reasons for it, but with cost of living movements and reducing state pensions, this changed the goalposts for many retirees who were banking on this to top up their pension. Whilst it was a plicy that was trying to do the right thing, it was a late addition to the agenda and was poorly thought out.

I'll admit I'd forgotten about what their actual policy on negative gearing was, I knew they took it away in full but forgot the bit about new properties being exempt, but even then, this was poorly thought out. The reasons for negative gearing are actually not a negative to the economy. Providing the ability for one to grow their wealth would utlimately result in a lowering of the state to provide fund either income support payments or state pensions later in life as wealth grows. The problem negative gearing created was, when it was implemented, it wasn't thought that people would use this to finance their significant property portfolios. 1 or maybe 2 properties aren't the issue. Its when people build entire portfolios, partly funded through reducing their taxes. The issue can be easily solved by capping the deductions that can be made as either of a % of your taxable income (again with an overall cap) or just setting a flat amount. Lets say that was $25k. Any losses made above that sum would be carried forward to when you sell the property as opposed to being treated as tax deductions immediately for a property you may not sell for 20-30 years. Deferred access to those tax benefits would have the desired result without stopping your everyday Aussie from purchasing an investment property.

Labor focusing on negative gearing on new properties was I think I remember designed to help first home buyers, yet a lot of first home buyers were being pushed into purchasing a new home rather than established due to the lower price and when many could stay with a parent through the building process. I bought my 1st house this way, and I know of many others that have done something similar. It was poorly thought out as it would have done the opposite of what it was designed for.

I actually wrote to my local Labor Candidate at the time and said
1. The changes to cash refunds of franking credits could be brought in progressively so that self funded retirees and others could have time to adjust. Maybe over 3 years or something like that
2. If you recall one of the arguments the LNP had about changes to negative gearing was that many middle income earners had property as an investment. My suggestion was that we still allow deducting of interest on investment property we put a cap on it, or a cap on the level of borrowing on which interest is deductible. Say loans up to $500k and only one property per taxpayer.
That way we stop the person earning $500k p.a. borrowing $2 million for investment properties.

The whole thing was handled so badly by the ALP but my view is that they need to be done and only Labor can do them.

 

[TT33]

Morrison is a much better talker/lier than Albanese. But being a good talker doesn't make you a good politician or prime minister.

I'm voting for a political party not the leader of a party. Labor's team is head and shoulders above those in the Liberal party.

Very true that the Labor team is far better that the ScuMo Government's, but really it wouldn't take much to do that.

 

[eZyT]

An article describing some differences between the two major parties for those that think they're all the same:

Undecided? Jaded with Australia’s major parties? Here are five stark differences between them this election | Paul Daley

I dedicate little attention to the daily campaign grind – but the contrasts between Labor and the Coalition are black and white

www.theguardian.com

anyone who think Labor and Liberal are all the same,

has a very, very, lazy or underpowered brain.

I have more respect for the fat headed privately educated ruling class Liberal who votes unashamedly for self-interest

than I do for the conservative voter who is too cognitively lazy to work out he is being *smile* in the arse.

(there it is, I just fell for the social Darwin trap laid by the same *smile*)

doh.

 

[spook]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1522366282481381376

Rorts, rorts, as far as the eye can see.

 

[BT Tiger]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1522366282481381376

Rorts, rorts, as far as the eye can see.

Oh but both sides do it, they're as bad as each other

 

[eZyT]

Rorts, rorts, as far as the eye can see.

I think we should use Corruption.

rort implies a loophole, a bit of cleverness. They slap each other on the back at The Club for a rort.

Its Corruption; systematic misuse of public money for their own benefit.

And you go to jail.

These crooked *smile* actively undermine any anti-corruption model because they are corrupt and dont wany to go to jail.

The model theyve drafted but not tabled has all sorts of 'safeguards, checks and balances', so nobody need lose their job, let alone go to jail.

Theyve missappropriated the term 'kangaroo court' like they missappropriate all just concepts.

They are, quite simply, the most horrible assembly of *smile* Our Nation has ever seen.

bjelke petterson, obeid, richardson, Menzies, were lightweights

 

[BT Tiger]

Same with the term "pork barelling". Makes it seem trivial - It's corruption.

At the very least is should be referred to as misuse of tax payers money.

 

[eZyT]

Same with the term "pork barelling". Makes it seem trivial - It's corruption.

At the very least is should be referred to as misuse of tax payers money.

yep.

it's corruption.

I dont reckon blokes like William Bligh et al would have felt as entitled to misappropriated rum and labour and property 250 years ago.

as these *smile*

 

[Ian4]

Unfortunately our friends in NSW didn't follow the HK model but introduced a public royal commission type investigation in its stead. This has led to situations like the recent investigation of Premier Glady's B, who was forced to resign from her role before being charged with anything, and who is still awaiting to hear the results of the investigation.
(The same system also creates all sorts of problems in regard to the evidence which might be called in any subsequent criminal prosecution, and also in regard to the protection of rights to do with self incrimination).

Given that the same legislation which was set up in HK (as above), might also have seen criminal prosecutions launched against half the federal cabinet, there is now little coalition support for change, or discussion of it at any level.
While changes to the criminal law are pretty much never made retrospective, ie in regard their application to previous conduct, none of the Libs or others want to draw further attention to what has been going on.

Simply the Libs have no way through this and Morrisons no policy agenda, will not change.

So the coalition wont dare promise anything on this issue in case they actually win, and as I see it, the public aren't again going to stomach a no comment approach to this collective govt theft of public funds.

My biggest fear isn't a Labor loss. My biggest fear is that this government won’t be held to account for its actions. We need to send a clear message that our elected representatives can never be allowed to act like this again. Plus, we can never allow any current government minister to ever be in power again and given an opportunity/incentive to repeat their mismanagement.

I’m tipping the Liberals will try to convince the crossbenches in the senate to either fight against the introduction of ICAC or vote for a version that doesn’t make it retrospective. One National have already stated they won’t support it.

 

[MD Jazz]

I get that the ALP is gun shy about some policies, especially tax policies. However one day we need a government with enough courage to do something about the cash rebate on franking credits and the excessive negative gearing and CGT benefits. There were so many lies told about these things ( remember TIm Wilson was lier in chief about the cash refunds on franking credits) that they have become toxic. In the end these things are inequitable and just bad tax policy but I live in hope that the ALP will have the courage to do it one day

Yeh, it's not that hard to demonstrate how unfair they are to the majority. I've seen it at play, I've posted before about my dislike of negative gearing particularly. They are not policies that benefit the majority of Australians.

 

[MD Jazz]

I was being a bit facetious with my comment. I remembered what the franking credits issue was. It mainly affecting retirees.

A big difference between retirees and pensioners. It was aimed at stopping the refunds of 100% of the tax paid on dividends for shares held in SMSF. I worked in a firm that had a lot of SMSF clients with significant super balances. They had large share portfolios and amassed 000's in tax refunds. Some clients called it the magic pudding. They had benefited from generous super contribution policies on the way through and then benefited again when those funds received fully franked dividends and they got a refund of all of the franking credits. So that tax that had been paid by a company on profits effectively went from being revenue for the Gov't to income for an individual. It wasn't what the imputation credits system was originally designed for which was to prevent double taxation.

As many suggest, a more symapthetic media would have sold it better.

 

[larabee]

Morrison flawlessly recites Coalition’s zero-point climate policy — The Shovel

"Another impressive media performance"

www.theshovel.com.au

 

[eZyT]

A big difference between retirees and pensioners. It was aimed at stopping the refunds of 100% of the tax paid on dividends for shares held in SMSF. I worked in a firm that had a lot of SMSF clients with significant super balances. They had large share portfolios and amassed 000's in tax refunds. Some clients called it the magic pudding. They had benefited from generous super contribution policies on the way through and then benefited again when those funds received fully franked dividends and they got a refund of all of the franking credits. So that tax that had been paid by a company on profits effectively went from being revenue for the Gov't to income for an individual. It wasn't what the imputation credits system was originally designed for which was to prevent double taxation.

As many suggest, a more symapthetic media would have sold it better.

if you take a trough away from pigs,

they'll bite you

 

[TT33]

Scumbag Tudge "forgot" that he transferred a $1m property into his ex - wife's name for 6 months.


What an absolute *smile* of a person.

Geez I hope he gets punted from my electorate. Absolute piece of **smile**

 

[spook]

Scumbag Tudge "forgot" that he transferred a $1m property into his ex - wife's name for 6 months.


What an absolute *smile* of a person.

Geez I hope he gets punted from my electorate. Absolute piece of **smile

https://twitter.com/x/status/1522397613387313153