If the government fails to get its ABCC legislation through the senate in a few weeks’ time and Malcolm Turnbull calls a double dissolution election, what are the likely concerns that will dominate the airwaves during the campaign?
There are a number of problems the government would prefer to avoid. So much of what they have done, or tried to do, has exposed their ideological bent towards their financial backers, the corporate sector and the wealthier individuals in the community.
They will want it to be about Trade Union corruption, but as the Panama Papers have cast such a dark shadow over tax minimisation schemes, one gets the feeling that corporate corruption could counter the minimal findings of the trade union Royal Commission.
One suspects also, that the government will not want to talk about the state of the economy. They made too many wild promises about their economic credentials before the last election and have shown, despite the rhetoric, they didn’t know what they were talking about.
The economy has not responded to their efforts. Unemployment is higher, debt (so called) is higher and deficit spending is higher. The so called “transition” often quoted by Scott Morrison is actually code for “we’re not sure what to do.”
So, if as expected, the ABCC union issue doesn’t cut through, has Malcolm Turnbull inadvertently exposed his government to a much needed examination of what, and who they really stand for? If so, how are they likely to manage the scrutiny?
In the absence of any positives to crow about, one can expect they will try to concentrate on the negative aspects of the Opposition. They might make it about Bill Shorten becoming Prime Minister. The Coalition think that would be a winner.
Liberal party supporters would like it to be about asylum seekers. They think that is the one area Labor cannot trump. They would also like it to be about foreign policy, thinking Julie Bishop is a hit at the U.N. But that would be straining credibility.
That is why this election will almost certainly be waged on perceptions. What the people think is the case, rather than the reality. Most elections are fought on perceptions because uncommitted voters take much of what they are told as being true without further consideration. Yet truth is so easy to manipulate.
Perceptions can be created in a fifteen second doorstop comment. It is so much easier for the Coalition to say Labor will take us deeper into debt without having to demonstrate how that would happen.
Even if Labor were to present fully costed policies on all their initiatives, the dissenting cry of “a great big black hole” would be heard across the nation, regardless of its accuracy.
So what is at stake? To win, Labor needs a net gain of 21 seats. But if the Coalition lose 16 seats, they lose their majority. A hung parliament is therefore a strong possibility.
Labor can reasonably count on 36% of the primary vote. The Coalition could expect to receive around 40%. The Greens will score at least 12% and the remaining 12% will be made up of independents and informal.
If policies are lost in translation and it comes down to personalities, the Coalition with Malcolm Turnbull would likely fare better, if only be a slim margin. Malcolm has clearly lost some of his shine, while Shorten has shown improvement.
If policies triumph over muck-raking, lies and dirty tricks, Labor could get over the line or form a loose coalition with independents in a hung parliament.
The last hung parliament served the nation well. Negotiations with the independents kept the various pieces of legislation tight and in the common interest.
Agreements were reached and things got done. By comparison, the last 30 months have been a dogs’ breakfast. Little wonder bills struggled to get the senate’s blessing.
Blatant favouring of one sector over another has been the hallmark of the present government. Ever keen to protect the corporate sector and the more affluent, they have shown a contempt for the low and middle income sector.
Labor would like to fight an election on the NBN. The realisation that what was to have been a state of the art project, and is now a second rate service, has struck a nerve with the voters.
Labor would also be comfortable having health and education at the forefront of peoples’ minds. The government’s cuts to public hospitals while appearing soft on multinational tax will hurt them.
Turnbull’s attempt to walk away from funding public schools in favour of private schools was stupid. Both issues should be on Labor’s short list.
Then there is Tony Abbott, who will want to be centre stage doing what he does best. Not only could he win it for Labor, but he could destroy his own legacy in the process. Abbott’s promise to Turnbull following the leadership coup that there would be no sniping has been seen for the lie that it was.
The one thing in Labor’s favour is that the voters are clearly as much dissatisfied with this government as they were with the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd debacle. Both are on the nose, but for different reasons.
Both have lost voter respect. Dissatisfaction with Labor stemmed largely from their internal bickering, the very kind in which the government is now embroiled. The Coalition are suffering from an absence of honesty.
There is every chance, however, Labor could have the government on the defensive for the majority of the campaign if it concentrates on education, health and tax revenues. On these three issues, the government is vulnerable. It will all depend on how they manage perceptions.
The big disappointment is that neither party can claim the intellectual high ground, let alone the moral. So, as usual, the winner will be the least disliked.
The next few weeks will be a political watcher’s rollercoaster.
[textblock style=”7″]
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
[/textblock]
The ABCC falls into the minor league when compared to the Panama papers but even more troubling for the government is the developing ‘inter-bank swap rate’ scandal currently being targeted by ASIC .
What is being revealed is a culture of exploitation and criminality at senior levels within the major banks fuelled by greed :
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-07/major-banks-the-target-of-asic-investigation-rates-rigging/7225274
If the unions required a Royal Commission there is no doubt that banking and finance need to be put under scrutiny.
Turnbull, unlike Abbott, will not receive the unequivocal endorsement of the Murdoch press. There will be no front pages screaming Australia Needs Malcolm like the Australia Needs Tony front pages during the last election. http://i.imgur.com/XscpFpK.jpg Andrew Bolt in his blog takes every opportunity to criticise and mock Turnbull. He cheers every time a LNP politician who supported Turnbull is in trouble, loses preselection or resigns.
Karma comes to Turnbull supporters.
Beware the curse of Abbott!
Things have not gone well for the 54 MPs who voted to replace Tony Abbott with Malcolm Turnbull six months ago.
First, they’ve seen their initial support sink so that Labor is now 50/50 with the Government – and with the wind behind it.
But many of the Turnbull backers have suffered personally. Count them.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/karma_comes_to_turnbull_supporters/
Elections are fought on highlighting both the ‘negatives’ and ‘positives’ of their opponents. In that regard, things are looking much better for Labor because of recent developments, much of which can be explained by reference to Turnbull’s lack of judgement. Entertaining the prospect of the return of taxing powers to the States, the abandonment of Gonski as a financial model for school education coupled with the aim of pulling the Commonwealth out of public education funding were monumental blunders. Add to that is the notion that the coming Budget will see a cut in the company tax rate. (How do you give a tax cut to those 579 companies who pay no tax?)
While the Panama Papers are having a major impact internationally, the local response is rather muted. That will change of course if Labor can link Turnbull to the scandal or at least link some of his donors to such activities. Look at the sh@t David Cameron is in.
I’m feeling hopeful. I like to think that the Six Degrees of Separation principle will be in play at this election. In those terms, the last three years could well be considered a very long campaign period where the normal netwoking between people…families, friends, workplaces, social activities, etc…will have consolidated the general understanding throughout the population that this LNP government, and their affiliates, have either hurt them and/or many that they care about, or will hurt… if they are not voted out so forcefully that they can never again pose a threat to common decency, integrity, and good government.
…The Coalition are suffering from an absence of honesty…
Ya think?
However, stating the obvious is far more productive than repeating lies, so I am not complaining, John Kelly.
@ Jack Russell
I am a little but hopeful myself – a hung parliament would suit me, all the quicker to ridding ourselves of a 2 party system and ushering in more nuanced, complex, difficult but fairer democracy than we have at present (other nations manage with a multi-party government). Living in a marginal electorate means I feel as if my vote is important (illusions, I know) – I also believe that another term with the coal-ition in power will be so counter-productive, that we will wind up the banana-republic of Keating’s claims. Which is why I am giving Labor my first preference in the lower house – just this time.
Stop The LNP.
A perfect outcome is a minority ALP government with the Greens holding the balance of power, and the Greens doing a deal with the ALP so the LNP are back on the opposition benches. Bring it on! As for the Senate, happy for the minor parties to hold the balance.
Glenn K
Labors inability to govern in its own right to some extent helped the LNP win the last election. I am not saying it was the Greens and independents fault but the circumstances surrounding a minority government leads to vulnerability, when combined with a leadership change any chances of re-election are minimal.
Abbott really does fit that classic descriptor of a politician?
How can you tell he is lying? When his lips are moving!
As for the worth of a hung parliament in negotiaitng tight policy? Not under the LNP! No chance! In my opinion Turnbull takes public transport because he couldn’t even negotiate a U turn!
If Shorten were to win, the negotiations would be much more “negotiable” provided the voters have the wisdom to kick out the hard right!
Hopefully too the voters have the wisdom to recognise the quality and quantity of political lies?
I have said it before and I will repeat it while I have breath. Yes, this government has displayed the same self interested leadership and left/right disunity as Labor BUT!!! Labor did not have the example of a previous leadership shit fight and white anting campaign! The LNP, while quick to criticise Labor for its leadership woes, has been been slow to learn by example. Labor deserves credit for showing discipline and unity throughout this debacle of a government. If the swinging voters can only recognise the lies and the slow learning, there may be hope for this country yet? Either way a recession is almost inevitable as the LNP have trashed the economy with poorly targetted spending and jobs for the boys.
Should I mention helicopters?
During the week a video maker going under the name Friendly Jordies released a video beseeching his fellow voting youth to register and vote and convince at least two friends to do the same to rescue us from this nightmare. He named it “y
U need 2 bug UR friends 2 enrol” It is worth a look.
Kerri, don’t hold out for voters having the wisdom to recognise the political lies – I am amazed at the number of voters I talk to who repeat the lie ‘the ALP destroy the economy’. This belief is accepted as fact, and cannot be dislodged. I despair.
kerri, I had a look. Not impressed. No logical argument in sight.
If that ‘video’ is supposed to encourage the ‘youth’ to both enrol and vote, I can begin to understand how easy it is for those who have access to ‘bullshit’ techniques to encourage the exact opposite. ?
Perhaps we could try ‘education’? It’s not a path well trod.
Go! Malcolm you will romp in; come Election time.
I intend to try and put as many facts out there on facebook as I can find.
I emplore you good folk to condense your stories to sound bites of fact and pit them on facebook also so that we can ensure that as many facebook users see what a shocker this government has been.
stephengb
You could fill several encyclopaedias with facts with the Abbott/Turnbull governments lies, inadequacies and the problems they have created.
How will the LNP help you the most, Conservatives Rule?
Bottom line they will keep Negative Gearing and CGT the way it is.
The LNP have spent a lot of time telling us that unions are unimportant and now they want us to believe that a construction worker who sticks up for him/her self is threatening the economy of the country lol! The Senate will not pass these unfair/unjust laws unless a federal ICAC/CCC is set up to look at “all” corruption, which to me seems a ‘fair go.’ The LNP DON’T want the federal ICAC/CCC because in NSW the state ICAC have found at least 12 State LNP politicians guilty of corruption or misdemeanors, so obviousl conservative federal conservative (LNP) have something to hide. I’m with Independent Senator Glenn Lazarus in Queensland, and he and his running mate Kerrod Walters will be 1&2 on my Senate ballot paper. There are plenty of people running for the Senate in a double disillusion so the LNP will be left of my Senate ballot paper, and perhaps we may get more good Senators who will truly be a house of review for the incoming Labor government.
Conservatives Rule
You definitely are a conservative you follow the LNP mantra to the letter.
Bugger what is best for the country and other people just do what is best for me.
Wish the parents of conservatives had spent a little time to teach their kids to share and make them aware that there is plenty for everyone. With a little bit of consideration and a decent government everyone could prosper just like it was before Abbott and Hockey destroyed the strongest economy in the world and doubled the deficit.
You’re on a pretty good deal by holding on to investment properties that you don’t live in and take no risk in at the expense of the Federal Budget and which Negative Gearing has artificially driven up property prices to almost double digits.
I suppose you’re happy with the thought that negative gearing sucks out a whopping 14 billion dollars a YEAR from the Federal budget thanks to tax loop holes which clearly only helps the top 40% of earners in this country.
Tell me again who the true leaners are?
PC
“you don’t live in and take no risk in”
That is a flawed argument I purchased a house that was rented out many years ago, as well as not paying rent for 4-5 months the tenants did damage equal to about 15% of the purchase price. The portion of the loss offset against other income was less than a third all because I did what I thought was the right thing by an existing tenant. In fact my family nearly ended up homeless because our house was sold and we could not get the tenant to vacate the house we wanted to move into.
“I suppose you’re happy with the thought that negative gearing sucks out a whopping 14 billion dollars a YEAR from the Federal budget thanks to tax loop holes which clearly only helps the top 40% of earners in this country.”
Negative gearing also puts money into the economy, provides affordable rental properties and saves billions being spent on public housing, it is also an income source for many self funded retirees.
“Tell me again who the true leaners are?”
The true leaners are the executives who screw down workers wages while lining their pockets with millions, these people are raping our public companies and the investors, in many cases our superannuation funds. 50 years ago most hard workers were in a position to buy a home and an investment property but nowadays it is difficult to buy a home.
The problem is wages have fallen well behind the cost of living and house prices, even rental returns have suffered as a result. 20 years ago I could have purchased houses near me and covered the interest costs and outgoings with rent, that is impossible nowadays. High house prices have affected everyone.
[“you don’t live in and take no risk in” – That is a flawed argument]
Spare me with your “Oh look over there, there’s a dead squirrel”.
Yes, wages have fallen but that doesn’t account for the housing bubble.
I am playing the smallest violin in the world as I read your sad sad story given the fact that – If your investment property doesn’t make more money in rent than the interest on that home investment property, then no matter how much the difference is you can claim it as a tax deduction. Negative Gearing is nothing but one big scam, and you know it.
Your greed is making, what is in essence, shelter un-affordable. Houses should have NEVER been allowed to be turned into a some kind of first in best dressed type of investment. What you support is a real life game of monopoly and we all know how that game turns out.
It isn’t hard to figure out what ‘will dominate the airwaves during the campaign’. As former ‘general counsel and secretary for Australian Consolidated Press Holdings Group’ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Turnbull) it goes without saying…
Matters Not it is unsurprising you were not moved by the video? It is not aimed at your demographic. Friendly Jordies has a following amongst youth who appreciate the humour with which he points out the hypocrisy of the LNP government. It is not my type of humour either but the points he makes are worthwhile! Last time I checked this video had 37,000 views of which I think yours and mine were outside of the usual age group. If his work gets even a couple of thousand of young voters to enrol and make a decision he has proved the worth of the $2,027 out of $3,000 he has already crowd funded on Patreon. As long as young voters believe the nursing home residents and Inspector Morse fans control the politics in this country we will never benefit from their interest in the future. To have a young person using modern humour and techniques to educate what, to many is a boring topic, is worth his weight in gold.
PC
If you want to place blame on the effect instead of the cause of the problem all you will do is chase your tale.
http://www.afr.com/real-estate/residential/australias-housing-boom-in-five-graphs-20140612-ixkox
The second graph down clearly shows that the cost of a house has increased significantly compared to household income, factor in how many more households have both parents working compared to the 70’s and 80’s.
“Gearing is nothing but one big scam, and you know it.”
The principle of housing investment is no different than any other business, you claim deductions against income. Maybe we should ban all business and all sit around playing monopoly.
Perhaps you are right about a business being entitled to claim ‘deductions against income’ but we are talking here about housing.
When a young couple front at an auction to buy their principal residence and what may be their first home they are at an unfair disadvantage to an investor who is prepared to bid over the odds because he/she knows that they can offset the losses on what is fundamentally a bad investment i.e. outgoings exceed income – against other income which is in effect a subsidy from the taxpayer.
They can then get a capital gain when they sell at a concessional rate of tax.
What Labor are proposing is fair and reasonable and should level the playing field for existing homes as the balance currently favours the investor and it is this that is fuelling the housing bubble.
Terry2
“Perhaps you are right about a business being entitled to claim ‘deductions against income’”
I know I am right.
Some people run a business on a weekend at a loss that is offset against income from their job. The ambition is to eventually run a profitable business that will employ them full time or build a business they can sell for a profit. No one is objecting to this but the principle is exactly the same as negative gearing and we allow it because people need incentive to work, save and invest.
I agree that negative gearing has inflated house prices to some extent but the biggest issue is wages not keeping pace with the cost of living and house prices for a long time. This is the cause of the problem and house prices being out of reach is the effect. Negative gearing is a hot topic at the moment, some think changes will help the tax man and others think it will make housing more affordable.
Do you honestly think house prices will fall with the proposed changes? I don’t it may make a slight difference to those who can afford a house but it won’t have enough impact to help battlers become home owners. From a revenue perspective it will only offset interest deductions to future years so no long term benefit but changes to CGT will increase revenue but don’t go far enough. Tax should be paid on 100% of the capital gain. this would boost revenue and favour long term investors rather than those out to make a fast buck.
Terry2
CGT can be avoided altogether if the proceeds from the sale of the asset is put into superannuation? Stopping this would definitely increase revenue.
Adopting the same policies as Israel (described in this article by Kaye Lee https://theaimn.com/tackling-inequality/ ) would have a positive effect on housing affordability. Anything else is like trying to reattach a severed limb with a band aide.
Wally! your economics drongo. Re
The principle of housing investment is no different than any other business, you claim deductions against income. Maybe we should ban all business and all sit around playing monopoly.
A house is home to live in and shelter from the outside weather. Its a home not a business. Unfortunately the Australian version of Old Kent Road has increased 10 times over. And we’ve allowed the Chinese to purchase Community Chess, Water Works,Electric Company and Free ? Parking. and build muliti story apartments on them.
Wally
Give up mate, you can’t win
I just accept that as one article contributor described, I must be a “Professional landlords who build personal wealth by owning so many investment properties that they don’t even bother with negative gearing because they don’t have an actual job, and instead just gather rents, are the very definition of rent-seekers – the term used to describe those who take from the pie but don’t grow it.”
I might take your previous suggestion, kick out all the tenants, flog of the properties, create half a dozen unemployed and invest in Uranium or Coal
He can’t hear you: Wally, the patriot, is too busy leeching off less fortunate Australians.
cornlegend
When there are no investors left and no affordable dwellings to rent I hope they remember what they wanted caused their situation.
Wally and cornlegend, as someone who had investment properties (houses and flats) let’s not kid ourselves re ‘motivations’. Sure I’ve had houses trashed and units vandalised which in some instances caused significant losses but my ‘intentions’ were clear. I wanted to make a profit using all the legal avenues available. Such avenues included ‘negative gearing’ when I was earning ‘good money’.
Let’s be clear, ‘negative gearing’ distorts the ‘free market’. It advantages those who ‘have it’ and does so at the expense of those who don’t. While it may not be the worst distortion in the ‘free market’ (there are so many), it nevertheless is an unwarranted ‘distortion’.
Black is white and white is black for you, hey Wally?
Thanks to people like you, we now have the third most expensive homes in the freaking world.-‘IN THE WORLD’.
Economics professors, The Reserve Bank and others say that this bubble is caused by investors using vacant homes as gambling chips.
But what’s even worse is that our Jesus-like property investors, like our Mother Wally Teresa, are off loading a disgraceful amount of risk from their investment onto the majority of taxpayers, you know the ones; the ones the property investors are screwing over in the first place with their over-inflated home and rental prices in the form of Negative Gearing.
Wally is saying negative gearing is a great idea and all the rest of Australia has to do to make this leech sucking policy work for them is either build a time machine and go back to the 70’s. Or baring that, if you don’t have an advance knowledge in applied quantum field theory, is to just go out and get a rich paying job.
Matters Not
Let’s be clear, I have never negative geared, a large proportion of the properties were inherited from my father and grandfather and, whilst it {property ownership} was born out of a hatred of banks by my grandfather,the family continues on the tradition.
This was not my main source of income, as I worked until early retirement.
I have no problems with people who do negative gear properties however.
I am also one who would be deemed by some as a “tax dodger” althhough I pay a large tax bill annually, I do indulge in tax minimisation {not tax avoidance} and pay way more than many hundredsof $million Companies .
I’m quite guilt free 😀
cornlegend, I am not criticising those who work within the law re tax minimisation. What I am critical of is the loopholes that exist within the current legal framework and the lack of political will to address same.
I am part of a family trust that engages in tax minimisation. You would have to be a mug to do otherwise.
When Costello introduced the ‘new taxation’ system, the promise was that family trusts and other ‘loopholes’ would be closed. They weren’t. (Talk about broken promises on a massive scale.)
All I want is a ‘fair’ legal framework. With the emphasis on the ‘fair’. And currently it’s simply not fair.
Thank goodness for Corporations that have lowered the bar to the bottom of the deepest oceans when it comes to tax avoidance.
Now everyone else who is siphoning the country of much needed wealth at the expense of the majority can look themselves in the mirror and confidently say “Sure I’m making homes unaffordable for my countrymen and women, but they should be thankful I’m not like those naughty naughty companies.”
And now I will laugh in your face. 😀
PC
If you want a debate or discussion on a subject keep to what is written and don’t make stupid assumptions and comments that are total bullshit like these.
“Thanks to people like you, we now have the third most expensive homes in the freaking world.-‘IN THE WORLD’. ”
As well as insulting me it makes you look like a tool. I own 1 house the one I live in.
“Wally is saying negative gearing is a great idea ”
Where and when did I say that? Have commented my concern that the changes to NG may hurt those it is intended to help.
Me-“Wally is saying negative gearing is a great idea ”
Wally now- “Where and when did I say that? Have commented my concern that the changes to NG may hurt those it is intended to help.”
Wally before- “Negative gearing also puts money into the economy, provides affordable rental properties and saves billions being spent on public housing, it is also an income source for many self funded retirees.”
Let me repeat what you said again:
Wally now- “Where and when did I say that? Have commented my concern that the changes to NG may hurt those it is intended to help.”
Wally before- “Negative gearing also puts money into the economy, provides affordable rental properties and saves billions being spent on public housing, it is also an income source for many self funded retirees.”
You are as lazy with the facts as you are in even stopping for a second to scroll up the page a bit and read what came out of your head.
You don’t even bother to stop and listen to yourself so what hope has anyone else got in you listening to anyone else.
You are such a Wally.
PC
“Negative gearing also puts money into the economy, provides affordable rental properties and saves billions being spent on public housing, it is also an income source for many self funded retirees.”
Is stating the facts and no where in that did I say “negative gearing is a great idea”. that is your twisted interpretation.
@ conservatives rule.
And when a bunch of out of work, unhoused, unfed and totally unsupported by the government but very well educated 40-50+ year old Australians come marching through your overcapitalised and undertaxed front door somewhere in the leafy suburbs of inner Melbourne or Sydney or wherever the hell you self righteous wankers call home, do you expect the 457V importacop security services are going to be able to stop us throwing you out into the street and your chinabuilt bmw into the river just because we have NOTHING else to do, NO money, and are tired of your continuous bullshit about how we just need to try a bit harder and stop complaining about the latest fta’s and taxation arangements because trickle down economics works as long as we are all patient enough.
Screw you. Pull your head out of your arse and take a look at the faces of the people in the supermarkets, who are already working 3 jobs between 2 adults just to make ends nearly meet as long as the rent doesn’t go up and little Alice’s school trip is the same amount as last year, and her brother will still fit his kinder year shoes.
Your pre- programmed ‘vote liberal’ private school crap makes me want to find you and feed you your ears, but my parents were both teachers, and I have manners and politeness, so I wont. Not today anyway.
After all. I can read and write and do my times tables and think for myself. Not just count money
Wally
“Negative gearing also puts money into the economy, provides affordable rental properties and saves billions being spent on public housing, it is also an income source for many self funded retirees.”
Who’s says so Wally? This is a load shit Wally ##?$#@????##$%? A big load of Bullshit
Our dear Wally is in the business of spreading pernicious lies.
Funny, last time I looked the mere act of negatively labeling a point of view did not constitute an argument against that point of view. But I guess that basic principle of logic doesn’t apply to shit people speak on political blogs.
Poor Wally !
Backyard Bob I could just as easily say that funny, last time I looked the mere act of negatively labelling select posts as being basically illogical and picking out there flaws doesn’t constitute an argument to or for a point of view. It’s just picking on posters, and who appointed a cop on the poster beat anyway?
ME,
You’ve appointed yourself to that position, it seems. You know your objection to my post necessarily results in infinite regress, right?
Thank you, Mobius. Well said.
Yep, knew I was doing what you were doing to point out what you were doing and thus the futility of it.
My two backyard bobs on it. Allow the posts to lie, good or bad, and talk to the topic.
Right, so you have, in fact, appointed yourself the post police. Good for you. I’ll speak to whatever the hell I like, thank you. If I’d made that point to Neil of Sydney you would not have said jack. Indeed, you would likely have lauded it.
Right now I’m making a dismissive hand waving gesture …
He’s not worth arguing with, Mobius. He’s always right. He’s perfect. He’s stupendous.
Our dear Michael is in the business of spreading pernicious lies.
Oh ! That’s Ruude Backyard Bob.
It sure is, Kylie! Which of course is the point.
Why would you want to be rude? It seems pointless.
If I’d made that point to Neil of Sydney you would not have said jack.
Point out where you’ve made that point to NoS, and if I didn’t say jack shit because on a very rare occasion I decided to read one of his posts I’ll concede your point. When I do read Neil’s post what I point out the vast amount of times he’s made that same point, and indeed almost word for word that same post, and to point out that he yet again has replied to a post on Liberal party failure by attacking Labor, usually something Labor in the distant past.
My bad then, sorry.
Michael,
Why would you want to be rude? It seems pointless.
Why would you want to arbitrarily direct this perfectly sound observation at me? Do you get what I’m saying? Someone gets to direct crap at Wally (you realise I said exactly what PC said to Wally, right?) with impunity and when I say something chiding such activity I’m the one in question? It’s a curious thing, Michael.
The broader point, which ought not need to be made, is that empty insults (rather than those embedded within an actual point or argument) are wont to drive people from a debate. For me that’s a bad thing because I thought Wally was making an excellent and informative contribution to this debate. For me his contribution was of value, notwithstanding my level of agreement.
I wasn’t defending him, but rather a principle. And I will continue to do so when I see fit.
OFFS, because you said this:
. . . which was of course in response to a statement that you were rude.
And then you bring up hashed up crap from months ago:
. . . after earlier saying on this site that YOU are allowed to say anything you want.
I too then are allowed to say anything I want . . . Get over it.
Comment edited by admin.
I was insulting Wally because of his constant hackneyed unsubstantiated views on this topic and many others. Especially his plea for wages to rise. Yet the (Clive Palmer in the room issue) is House Prices. Rents etc The Cost of Housing in this country is the number one issue. Which includes homelessness. This is the biggest and shameful issue effecting most Australians. Its outrageous and pathetic and can solved so simply. But its lead by greed and apathy. Having a roof over your head is a human right. So Wally stop muddying the waters.
Michael,
Are you being deliberately dense? First, I did not bring up stuff from “months ago”. I mean, wtf are you talking about? I was referring to the content of this very discussion. Have you read it?
Second, I did not say, at any time, I could say anything I want. I said, in direct response to ME’s “demand” that I “talk to the topic”, that I would “speak to whatever” I like.
If you can’t tell the difference you’re not trying.
Indigo
“I was insulting Wally”
Why? My point of view is as valid as anyone else’s and if you believe I am wrong prove it. That is what adult comments and discussion is about, I gave up name calling back in primary school.
“Especially his plea for wages to rise.”
Do a comparison of wages 30-40 years ago compared to house prices and compare the same figures today and you will find that house prices have doubled. The proposed changes to negative gearing are not going to decrease house prices by 50% and if house prices do drop that much we will be in more shit than a Werribee duck. There will be so much unemployment people would not be able to afford a house anyhow. Until the top 5% stop taking 50% of the earnings and share some with the other 95% there will be no dramatic change.
“Cost of Housing in this country is the number one issue. Which includes homelessness. This is the biggest and shameful issue effecting most Australians. Its outrageous and pathetic and can solved so simply”
If it is so bloody simple explain how to fix the problem.
My error. I apologise.
Indido,
I wouldn’t mind your insight into this either
“Which includes homelessness. This is the biggest and shameful issue effecting most Australians. Its outrageous and pathetic and can solved so simply.”
FFS, give us the simple solution