|
Les Affaires posted:They are also some of the least likely to ever vote labor so shorten couldn’t give a poo poo. You can watch the linked video of John Bolton campaigning for literally anyone but Labor and complaining that ON preferenced them in a seat.
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 00:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 16:47 |
|
|
I don't get why rich people are appearing publicly to act poor when any journalists worth their weight can pick up on the fact that they are actually rich as gently caress
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 00:54
|
|
|
It's an increasingly well known thing these days that the younger demographic are steering hard left and their parents/grandparents are divided because while they have their own self interest to deal with, they're also seeing their progeny struggling and wanting to help. Newspoll reflects it, as do a bunch of other polls, and so Labor (and the Groins) can quite happily target policies that specifically help the younger generations at the expense of wealthy seniors and not lose a smidge of support.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 00:57
|
|
|
Anidav posted:I don't get why rich people are appearing publicly to act poor when any journalists worth their weight can pick up on the fact that they are actually rich as gently caress If you are acting poor by living waterfront and saying you now have 10k less a year, then you aren't very good at acting poor. The median house price for that suburb is over half a mil, cry me a river.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:01
|
|
|
Anidav posted:I don't get why rich people are appearing publicly to act poor when any journalists worth their weight can pick up on the fact that they are actually rich as gently caress The journalists don't give a gently caress op
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:03
|
|
|
Median is over half a million? Seems pretty cheap. Gladesville median house price is over 2M, surely.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
JBP posted:i only post earnestly from the heart -/- It would seem that we have come back to the place we were in during the fifties and sixties. Fundamental dissatisfaction with the ruling elite is forcing a counter culture to rise up. Let's hope this lot do better at it tank Boomers Co.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:15
|
|
|
Honestly we should just confiscate all super and replace it with a doubling of the retirement pension (and newstart) and be done with it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:20
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:Median is over half a million? Seems pretty cheap. Gladesville median house price is over 2M, surely. 1br apartment in Gladesville is $500k+. Anything for a family appears to start at $1.2m but the majority looks to be $1.5m+ quite easily.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:21
|
|
|
Zenithe posted:If you are acting poor by living waterfront and saying you now have 10k less a year, then you aren't very good at acting poor. The median house price for that suburb is over half a mil, cry me a river. The median price for a parking spot in Gladesville would be over half a mil.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:22
|
|
|
I think that if you publicly complain about the government taking your money the government should be able to take half your money
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:22
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/newspoll-siege-mentality-eats-at-team-malcolm/news-story/b7409e062c56f36496859e08095f3c88 How convenient. Another woman to blame for poor prime ministerial performance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:27
|
|
|
Les Affaires posted:Honestly we should just confiscate all super and replace it with a doubling of the retirement pension (and newstart) and be done with it. What? No. That's stupid. What we should do is fix the stupid system so people with huge amounts of super don't get the following: 1. The pension 2. Franking credits 3. Any position to speak from at all. If you have over $2M in super you cannot call talkback radio or appear in newspaper columns
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:28
|
|
|
I could bloody flog what appears to be a $3m waterfront and move to a nice million dollar home then live like a prince forever, but no, the government is stealing $10k from me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:28
|
|
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:How convenient. Another woman to blame for poor prime ministerial performance. Amazing how these misogynists (especially Abbott) who don't recognise women in positions of power need a woman to tell them what to do at all hours of the day.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:28
|
|
|
Les Affaires posted:It's an increasingly well known thing these days that the younger demographic are steering hard left I want to believe this is happening but have massive doubts about that actually being the case - where do you look to prove it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:40
|
|
|
aejix posted:I want to believe this is happening but have massive doubts about that actually being the case - where do you look to prove it? Here's a few: The Saturday Paper (One free article per week): https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2018/04/07/turnbull-and-the-boomer-racket/15230232006058 Croikey (sub): this one is about Newspoll being ridiculously consistent over the last few years, basically pointing to the same phenomena: https://www.crikey.com.au/2018/04/09/poll-bludger-how-bad-luck-factors-into-turnbulls-newspoll-problem/ and of course here's Grundle waxing lyrical about why the LNP seem stuck where they are: https://www.crikey.com.au/2018/04/09/turnbull-isnt-the-problem/ If you don't have a crikey sub The Saturday Paper article should be enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:49
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SkyNewsAust/status/983308274953928704 S-s-ss-senpai???
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:50
|
|
|
MysticalMachineGun posted:What? No. That's stupid. Why should we continue fixing a system that rewards hoarding during your working life in the promise of a comfortable retirement? That just creates a perfect alignment of class with age, and has put us in the situation we're in now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 01:51
|
|
|
Les Affaires posted:Why should we continue fixing a system that rewards hoarding during your working life in the promise of a comfortable retirement? That just creates a perfect alignment of class with age, and has put us in the situation we're in now. I just can't fathom how anyone can't reconcile earning $40-50k as a good income and buying a $90k house in 1985 with earning $80-90k now (also a good income) but being faced with paying $1m for a family home. Like it isn't loving rocket science. Not to mention the price of that house is probably inflating faster than you can save even if you save $1000 every month.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:01
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:https://twitter.com/SkyNewsAust/status/983308274953928704 Charity Bike Rid
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:05
|
|
|
The funniest part about the irony for me is that fewer and fewer people in the younger generations are taking the risk to start their own business, because they either do not have the startup capital or they are too risk averse after years of being hosed around with or not getting raises or whatever. When you have significantly less people starting businesses than before, you lose a large chunk of people who may even remotely align with the whole LNP "Business is good" ideology, because people are more inclined to vote in their self interest, and if their self interest is based on being a wage or salary worker, guess who they're more likely to vote for? E: While it would be cool to have more people forming businesses (just because it adds to diversity in the economy), I will not miss the side effect of having more people running around thinking their struggle as an entrepreneur means "all the rest of you should stop punishing success".
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:05
|
|
|
Les Affaires posted:Why should we continue fixing a system that rewards hoarding during your working life in the promise of a comfortable retirement? That just creates a perfect alignment of class with age, and has put us in the situation we're in now. Superannuation takes some pressure off of the state to provide care in later life by having a mandatory savings account for working people. If you don't earn enough or aren't working at all you won't get it but you will get the pension. This core idea of it seems sound to me. What's gone wrong is years and years of changes to benefits, superannuation and what count as assets as multiple governments chase the grey-haired vote. Instead of a person who has been paid well and saved lots of super not being a burden on the state in retirement, we get is capitalist scumbags dodging taxes while they work and then reducing their measurable income in retirement to suck on the public teat when they don't need to. I think if we were to remove super altogether a lot of people would be completely hosed come age 70 or would need to keep working forever as our society doesn't really encourage wise saving for tomorrow, let alone 40 years in the future. If super were used properly - that is to say, invested in good shares while it's being earned and then being used to keep you off the pension in retirement it's a net benefit to society. Removing levers to reduce your measurable income and introducing an estate tax would go a long way to "fixing" super without having to kill it off entirely.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:07
|
|
|
JBP posted:I just can't fathom how anyone can't reconcile earning $40-50k as a good income and buying a $90k house in 1985 with earning $80-90k now (also a good income) but being faced with paying $1m for a family home. *In a very Stephen Koukoulas voice* average repayments aren't high and therefore
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:08
|
|
|
Anidav posted:I don't get why rich people are appearing publicly to act poor when any journalists worth their weight can pick up on the fact that they are actually rich as gently caress If you can take one thing away from all of this, the thing you should take away from it is that THE PEOPLE REPORTING THE NEWS ARE ALSO THE PEOPLE VOTING FOR THE LIBERAL PARTY. Celebrities and news reporters for major outlets (so not independent or minor, such as Crikey and Buzzfeed) are all, to the letter, part of the class they are defending. Yes, not all of them have millions of dollars in the bank, but most of them earn enough that they would fall way over the line where Rusted on Liberal Voters begin, and the older generations will be sitting on millions of dollars of property. These people are either legit loaded, or worse, the HENRY demographic, who stand to lose the most from any move towards equality. Why the gently caress would you expect an ambitious news reporter on a healthy 6 figure salary to do anything to jeopardise their fragile hold on a comfortable living? The media establishment has been lying through their teeth to the working classes for decades about their opportunities, and what's best for them. The celebrities people worship were complicit in convincing multiple generations of children that they were all going to be millionaires if they just tried hard enough. poo poo, most Americans, and I'm positive that a decent chunk of idiot swing voters in Australia still believe this. This is why you get people earning 50k voting against estate taxes. Aspirational Class fuckery. There are a handful of celebs that give a poo poo, but most of them aren't lining up to give away their beachfront properties or sports cars. They're complicit as gently caress in the current situation, as much as the small l liberals who infected the supposedly left wing parties in the 90s and drove them hard into the neoliberal agenda: Blair, Keating, Clinton etc. Don't be a sucker - the media aren't interested in the truth. They're going to fight tooth and nail against any attempts to make life fairer for the majority.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:12
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:*In a very Stephen Koukoulas voice* If a bank said "I'll sell you this house for $250k which is like for like what your mum lives in as long as you pay 10-15% interest for the first five years of the loan" I would give them my attainable 20% deposit, thank them and loving take it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:15
|
|
|
 this is fine.jpg
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:23
|
|
|
Just sat in a cafe next to some bow tie wearing gently caress of a greens staffer complaining about snowflakes and sjws burn the party to the ground
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:27
|
|
|
Solemn Sloth posted:Just sat in a cafe next to some bow tie wearing gently caress of a greens staffer complaining about snowflakes and sjws burn the party to the ground Was this in Melbourne?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:29
|
|
|
Senor Tron posted:Problem with that is the Greens can't exactly threaten their preferences to go elsewhere. The day that the Greens preference Libs above Lab is the day they lose a fuckton of supporters. This is how the majors think, that the system can't possibly go on without them. You're thinking too bi-camerally (an adverb i just made up). Far more likely is a coalition of minor parties sharing preferences or enough primary vote to weld them into a new party. Now multiply that and we could have as many as five parties with enough primary that can't be ignored but not enough to govern outright. That's where I think we're headed. Cartoon posted:It would seem that we have come back to the place we were in during the fifties and sixties. Fundamental dissatisfaction with the ruling elite is forcing a counter culture to rise up. Let's hope this lot do better at it tank Boomers Co. Think earlier. BTW, if anyone cares to make a historical timeline of australian parties infographic (because I can find none, but there are heaps of really good American ones), you'll be Twitter famous. We really need something like that. Anyway, I'm loathe to depend on Wikipedia but you can start with their list and you can see that outside the main federal sphere there's a whole bunch of whackjobs out in the sticks, and some of them have been around for quite a while. But where you should start is here. Just read the unadorned facts about the first few elections. It should ring a bell. That's right, coalitions and minority governments started us off. Then we got some bicameral action up to the outbreak of WW1, which an ill-judged double dissolution by the Libs which gave ALP power (it backfired that time). Then coalitions welded into new parties and Billy Hughes happened and things went downhill for Labor, especially in 1923 when the Bruce-Page Nationalist-Country Coalition (there's a mouthful) came in. Anyway, you get the idea. The primary vote has shifted this way and that even after preferential voting was introduced in 1918. All it's really done is hold back the tide for the majors for a few decades. We've been living in a dreamworld since the 50's and it's time to wake up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:45
|
|
|
Solemn Sloth posted:Just sat in a cafe next to some bow tie wearing gently caress of a greens staffer complaining about snowflakes and sjws burn the party to the ground Is there an actual environmentalist party to challenge the greens?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:50
|
|
|
ewe2 posted:This is how the majors think, that the system can't possibly go on without them. You're thinking too bi-camerally (an adverb i just made up). Far more likely is a coalition of minor parties sharing preferences or enough primary vote to weld them into a new party. Now multiply that and we could have as many as five parties with enough primary that can't be ignored but not enough to govern outright. That's where I think we're headed. But this ignores material conditions and improvements in tech. At the start of the last century the only mass communication medium was the newspaper and the telegraph, then radio, TV, and now the internet. With each leap has come consolidation and a shuffling of power amongst politics. The main thing the majors are adjusting to now is social media because it's a low-effort "Letters to the Editor" without a filter writ large. It might be high time for a schism in politics to adjust to this but it'd be foolish to assume the majors can't co-opt it in their own interests right now. Bernardi's move of setting up "Australian Conservatives" was quite clever because he took the name that a chunk of the LNP actually call themselves, so he's sitting over on the sidelines cheerfully waving at them to cross the line. Don't be surprised if many of the existing LNP incumbents make the move after they lose the next election because by then they will have nothing to lose, especially if they all do it in unison.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 02:54
|
|
|
Yes, Libs will jump to the Australian Conservatives, the party that only got one member in SA who then immediately defected to the Libs
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 03:16
|
|
|
My anxiety disorder went into overdrive and I lost the ability to leave my house. I'm on disability now. My roommate moved out and I can't sublet or move because of anxiety so now I'm paying both rents. I tell Centrelink this over the internet so I can get extra rent assistance as I'm no longer sharing. Centrelink tells me I need to provide proof that I can't provide because I can't leave the loving house to get it. So they cut me off of rent assistance entirely for not proving that I need more rent assistance. So now I pay roughly 103% of my income as rent and my bank account was almost cleaned out by an outrageous electricity bill. I called Centrelink but ran out of credit while on hold. I don't have a landline. My internet bill is due but I was waiting on my payment that now doesn't even cover rent. So. I put in a request online for them to call me but it says wait times vary and not to do it for urgent things. I loving love Centrelink. I should have known better than to contact them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 03:22
|
|
|
JBP posted:Was this in Melbourne? Yeah CBD
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 03:22
|
|
|
MysticalMachineGun posted:Yes, Libs will jump to the Australian Conservatives, the party that only got one member in SA who then immediately defected to the Libs There are a few maniacs that might roll the dice when they lose their seats.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 03:25
|
|
|
Solemn Sloth posted:Just sat in a cafe next to some bow tie wearing gently caress of a greens staffer complaining about snowflakes and sjws burn the party to the ground which cafe and how hard did you punch them
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
Les Affaires posted:But this ignores material conditions and improvements in tech. At the start of the last century the only mass communication medium was the newspaper and the telegraph, then radio, TV, and now the internet. With each leap has come consolidation and a shuffling of power amongst politics. The main thing the majors are adjusting to now is social media because it's a low-effort "Letters to the Editor" without a filter writ large. It might be high time for a schism in politics to adjust to this but it'd be foolish to assume the majors can't co-opt it in their own interests right now. The genie is out of the bottle and the one-to-many model of media management is dying, dying hard but still dying. This is disruption of a different level to the kind of media consolidation which is by no means a write-off, just that it can't compete with free. One-to-many controls the flow of ideas, the only serious political use of the internet has been fake news, and it's yet to be seen if that can be a winner because it's so dependent on secrecy and it's already failed that test, obviously. Whoever turns up after Trump if not Pence, is going to have to work very hard to change the perception of the electorate to his party much like the Right's determination to belabour everyone about Obama and Hilary for the next decade. But that's American politics, it doesn't translate so well here even though Liberal Party darlings think it does. Like political ads: you only have to demonstrate how staged and contradictory they are to be an effective counter. Politicians are already trying to go around the media to coopt the internet but this only works on people who are always going to support those particular politicians, it doesn't translate into a political movement. This is particularly why they hate GetUp! because it IS an internet political movement that isn't co-optable. And I think, at least for this country, the drive to make the internet "safe" for politicians is stronger from the "establishment" than a genuine control of the internet media cycle if there ever can be one. So if there's a threat, that's where to look. I'm not saying some Dvorak-bs about the internet is freedom etc. But heres a thing: the people who sell ads lie a lot about success-rates to their customers to keep the money coming. You can micro-target people up the wazoo and if you get 30-50% that's enormous. Spammers only need 5% to tick over, that's never going to work with politics. And it never translates to 80-100% like the sales pitch. Up to now getting the voter via media at those levels of 30% were enough to shift the primary vote up. Now, it's not enough and it will never get enough, particularly with a generation who've grown up with the tricks on the internet, it's a much harder sell. You can facebook fake news them once, and you're done. The smart politicians will realize this eventually. With that kind of frustration, policing the internet is much easier. Look how mad the government's got while it still doesn't understand the internet. quote:Bernardi's move of setting up "Australian Conservatives" was quite clever because he took the name that a chunk of the LNP actually call themselves, so he's sitting over on the sidelines cheerfully waving at them to cross the line. Don't be surprised if many of the existing LNP incumbents make the move after they lose the next election because by then they will have nothing to lose, especially if they all do it in unison. We can't see how "clever" it is until the election. But I doubt he has that kind of pull, many of them dislike him personally and they sure as hell won't take orders from him. Everything I see about Bernardi says "idealistic egotist" which is by no means unusual in a politician, just not so much a successful one, it's the pragmatic egotists you have to watch out for. He's a great salesman, but a leader, not so much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 03:38
|
|
|
NXT changes name to Centre Alliance. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 03:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 16:47 |
|
|
TheMightyHandful posted:
This seems like something which should be illegal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2018 03:46
|
|
