SkyscraperCity banner

Who will you vote for in the House of Representatives?

  • Labor

    Votes: 35 44.9%
  • L/NP

    Votes: 26 33.3%
  • One Nation

    Votes: 3 3.8%
  • IND/Other

    Votes: 3 3.8%
  • Green

    Votes: 11 14.1%

  • Total voters
    78
  • Poll closed .
1 - 20 of 4036 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,707 Posts
Should we do all of our political arguments in this thread for now, and then go back to the other one once the election is over for bitching about the Shorten government? :)


Of course the ALP are the overwhelming favourites to win, but they had a very poor first week of the campaign. The last chance for the LNP is to talk about Labor's higher taxes, and the danger to the economy of the rush to cut emissions past our promised targets. Which personally, whilst admirable, I think is a waste of effort compared to what is going to happen globally. Bankrupting ourselves isn't going to influence other countries to be better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,453 Posts
I hope Shortens media climate costing stuff up will be his John Hewson moment...But the true believers have the knack of going blind and deaf in selective moments...plus remember Labor is a shoe in in party preferred polling...Ideological greens will always align with Labor and we have to understand there is always a small percentage of that kind in any community.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
710 Posts
I hear the Labor party is planning a 40% inheritance tax.....its all over Facebook and the Labor party is trying to get the posts deleted..................serves them right given the Mediscare campaign they ran against Turnbull.....They claim its all BS of course (which is currently is), however an inheritance tax is certainly on the agenda for the Greens and the further to the left Labor goes, it will become their policy as well.
 

·
Banned
Tremendous
Joined
·
8,579 Posts
I hear the Labor party is planning a 40% inheritance tax.....its all over Facebook and the Labor party is trying to get the posts deleted..................serves them right given the Mediscare campaign they ran against Turnbull.....They claim its all BS of course (which is currently is), however an inheritance tax is certainly on the agenda for the Greens and the further to the left Labor goes, it will become their policy as well.
So pay shitloads of tax all your life but work hard and invest wisely so you can provide for your family only to get it taxed again? Sounds like a great idea.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
15,980 Posts
Discussion Starter #11

·
Registered
Joined
·
757 Posts
He wasn’t able to answer the question, and he keeps trying to dodge it. Jumping the gun to call that winning.

Why is it BS to ask what the policy costs and what is the benefit. If the aim is reduce global warming temps, how much is $35 billion (or whatever the cost is), going to contribute to reduction of temperature by?

It’s a simple question that should be asked and answered.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
757 Posts
Inheritance tax will work against people putting money into super and having that retirement safety net, even if they don’t use it. Inequality isn’t really an issue in Australia and is not getting worse. In fact it’s improved over the last decade since the GFC. So it doesn’t really make sense in that respect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,717 Posts
I hear the Labor party is planning a 40% inheritance tax.....its all over Facebook and the Labor party is trying to get the posts deleted..................serves them right given the Mediscare campaign they ran against Turnbull.....They claim its all BS of course (which is currently is), however an inheritance tax is certainly on the agenda for the Greens and the further to the left Labor goes, it will become their policy as well.
Scare campaigns often work. I am sure there are some on the far left of the ALP who would support an inheritance tax much like there are those on the far Right of the Conservatives and their backers who would love to dismantle the public health system. Lucky for most of us the sensible centre still holds.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
15,980 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
He wasn’t able to answer the question, and he keeps trying to dodge it. Jumping the gun to call that winning.

Why is it BS to ask what the policy costs and what is the benefit. If the aim is reduce global warming temps, how much is $35 billion (or whatever the cost is), going to contribute to reduction of temperature by?

It’s a simple question that should be asked and answered.
No one asked a question in that video.

$35bn is a figure pulled out of the arse of the LNP. Ignores cost of climate change altogether.

You know you're losing the debate when big business side with those proposing to take action.

What inheritance tax btw? This is not on the agenda (though it should be, arguably).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,717 Posts
Inheritance tax will work against people putting money into super and having that retirement safety net, even if they don’t use it. Inequality isn’t really an issue in Australia and is not getting worse. In fact it’s improved over the last decade since the GFC. So it doesn’t really make sense in that respect.
Tell that to the workers who have had their penalty rates cut or those who have seen bugger all real wage growth. CEO's, executives and corporations don't seem to have the same struggles and seem to have done very well for themselves. Not much shared success from what I can see.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
757 Posts
Labor aren’t telling the public what it’s going to cost, so someone has to try and work it out.

So its $35billion until labor informs the public otherwise.

So What’s the measure of success of climate change policy? We are led to believe it’s temperature.

But if you prefer to measuring in cost reduction, there’s a cost from climate change plus $35 billion from labor. how much will it reduce the climate change costs by?

Let’s be real it’s throwing away $35 billion, for little positive outcome. And the public needs to understand that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
757 Posts
Tell that to the workers who have had their penalty rates cut or those who have seen bugger all real wage growth. CEO's, executives and corporations don't seem to have the same struggles and seem to have done very well for themselves. Not much shared success from what I can see.

The data doesn’t support the anecdotes unfortunately.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,717 Posts
^^ Not sure the lower income voters or those on newstart care too much about the productivity commission findings. We have seen weak wages growth. Since 2007-08, income growth has stalled — average weekly household incomes grew by just $27 to $1,009 per week over this period. The income of the top 1 per cent of income earners has increased disproportionately. Corporate profits have also been good but their workers are not getting much of a share.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
15,980 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Labor aren’t telling the public what it’s going to cost, so someone has to try and work it out.

So its $35billion until labor informs the public otherwise.

So What’s the measure of success of climate change policy? We are led to believe it’s temperature.

But if you prefer to measuring in cost reduction, there’s a cost from climate change plus $35 billion from labor. how much will it reduce the climate change costs by?

Let’s be real it’s throwing away $35 billion, for little positive outcome. And the public needs to understand that.
Cost who or what? Labor (unlike the LNP) aren't proposing to use taxpayers money to pay big polluters to cut carbon emissions.
 
1 - 20 of 4036 Posts
Top