- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
Uh...
quote:Veteran Liberal MP Philip Ruddock has announced his retirement from federal politics, after being announced as Special Envoy for Human Rights.
Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said Mr Ruddock's role would include the promotion of Australia's candidacy for membership of the Human Rights Council.
Ms Bishop said Mr Ruddock would be Australia's first Special Envoy for Human Rights.
"Mr Ruddock will focus on advancing Australia's human rights priorities of good governance, freedom of expression, gender equality, the rights of indigenous peoples, and national human rights institutions," she said in a statement.
"Mr Ruddock will actively promote Australia's candidacy for membership of the Human Rights Council for the 2018–20 term.
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2016 06:17
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2024 04:54
|
|
- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
Sydney lockout laws: Premier Mike Baird defends laws as independent review approaches
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/sydney-lockout-laws-premier-mike-baird-defends-laws-as-independent-review-approaches-20160209-gmp6dw.html
quote:NSW Premier Mike Baird has all but ruled out any changes to the state government's controversial "lockout" laws, just as his government prepares to review the legislation.
The Premier took to Facebook to address what he called "growing hysteria" about the impact of the laws, two years since they were passed.
"The main complaints seem to be that you can't drink till dawn any more and you can't impulse-buy a bottle of white after 10pm," Mr Baird wrote, in a reference to recent criticism that claims the laws depress Sydney's nightlife and undercut its claims to be a global city.
"I understand that this presents an inconvenience. Some say this makes us an international embarrassment.
"Except, assaults are down by 42.2 per cent.
"And there is nothing embarrassing about that."
The reforms were introduced under former premier Barry O'Farrell two years ago following high-profile instances of so-called alcohol-fuelled violence.
Mr Baird and his predecessor have been trailed by critics of the laws on social media. Even Mr Baird's recent Instagram post marking New Year's Eve with a glass of champagne was flooded with negative comments about the effects of the lockout.
The reforms restricted the sale of alcohol and operating hours for pubs and clubs in Sydney's centre, forbidding bottle shops from selling alcohol after 10pm and restricting licensed venues in Sydney's CBD and Kings Cross from accepting new patrons after 1.30am and serving alcohol at 3am.
"Some have suggested these laws are really about moralising," Mr Baird said. "They are right. These laws are about the moral obligation we have to protect innocent people from drunken violence.
"[Those] who wish to define our city by one street on Kings Cross make the hysterical claim that Sydney is dead.
"They couldn't be more wrong. This is the greatest city in the world and it is now safer and more vibrant than ever."
Mr Baird said the number of small bars in the city had doubled in the period since the lockout was brought in.
Emergency service workers and some criminologists have praised the laws for reducing crime rates, while the business lobby has argued that the changes are devastating Sydney's hospitality industry and nightlife.
One recent review commissioned by the City of Sydney found foot traffic in Kings Cross was down nearly 60 per cent about 11 pm. But the methodology behind that report has come in for criticism with accusations of cherry-picking data.
Prominent businessman Matt Barrie wrote a tirade against the laws that was widely shared online this week.
He described the regulations as reflecting what happens when "a state gets taken over by a cabal of zealots whose only policy is religious ideology".
Mr Barrie responded to the Premier's post on Tuesday, noting his own piece had been read some 900,000 times with mostly favourable responses.
This month the Baird government begins its review of the lockout laws, which will seek testimony on their impact on Sydney businesses as well as on crime rates.
Justice Minister Troy Grant has said that the state government will "have a firmly stated position about the future of lockouts" once the review is complete.
But the Premier's post seemingly all but rules out the possibility that the laws might relax.
"It is going to take a lot for me to change my mind on a policy that is so clearly improving this city," Mr Baird said.
drat, you're right Mike. Although people are freely available to flock to the casino and Gamble Responsibly...
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2016 06:19
|
|
- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
AABHAAHJSAHAHSAHAHSHBHAHAHAHBHAHAKLALAHAHAHAHAHAH
Greg Hunt wins inaugural Best Minister in the World award at Dubai summit
quote:World leaders, scientists and media experts are attending the summit which features forums on the future of renewable energy, zombie apocalypse preparedness and the future of money.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 01:24
|
|
- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
Holy poo poo did you see what they won for being Property Investors of the Year?
quote:A prize pack worth $17,146 including:
$5,000 cash from Crawford Realty and Your Investment Property
A 12-month Real Estate Investar ‘Premium’ membership valued at $2,988
A tailored risk profle and strategy plan by MyProp Mentor Me valuedat $2,500
A selection of reports from Washington Brown valued at $2,360
My Knowledge access from Real Estate Investar valued at $850
A 12-month membership to MyProp.com.au valued at $259
A selection of reports from RP Data valued at $200
A 12-month (platinum) membership to NMD Data valued at $199
A 12-month membership to HomeSource Access valued at $110
A 12-month subscription pack including Your Investment Propertyand Your Mortgag
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 01:40
|
|
- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
We need a sort of Super-Basic-Income. How will Kate Moloney pay off her crippling debts otherwise?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 02:39
|
|
- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
Tony Abbott and other Liberals took Rolexes they thought were fake
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/10/liberals-took-rolex-and-other-designer-watches-assuming-they-were-were-fake
quote:A group of Liberal party MPs, including the former prime minister and then federal opposition leader Tony Abbott, are under scrutiny over $250,000 worth of designer watches they were given by a visiting billionaire from China almost three years ago – that were assumed to be fakes.
Among them is the embattled MP Stuart Robert, who was then the opposition’s defence, science, technology and personnel spokesman, and is now under intense political pressure over a controversial trip to China in 2014.
“Instant noodle billionaire” Li Ruipeng, the chair of the Li Guancheng Investment Management Group, gave Abbott, Robert and the then opposition industry spokesman, Ian Macfarlane, designer watches out of a plastic bag at an informal dinner at Parliament House in June 2013 as a goodwill gesture.
There were also watches for Abbott’s wife, Margie, and Robert’s wife, Chantelle, who were not present at the dinner – but not Abbott’s then chief of staff, Peta Credlin, who was.
(The then Queensland minister Rob Molhoek also received a Cartier Ballon Bleu bracelet watch, valued at $23,400, from Guancheng in 2013 – the most expensive gift received by any Newman government official in that financial year, and surrendered by Molhoek to the Ministerial Services Branch.)
Macfarlane, assuming his Rolex was a fake worth between $300 and $500, declared the gift with the clerk of the House of Representatives but kept it (“and wore it occasionally,” says the Herald Sun).
Macfarlane had the watch valued in Sydney after the September federal election, after the then Liberal candidate for Moore, Ian Goodenough, favourably compared it to his own, genuine Rolex.
Macfarlane was told his watch was worth about $40,000 – and his had obviously not been as expensive as those given to Abbott and Margie Abbott.
Though the clerk told him he was entitled to keep it, he returned it to Li Ruipeng’s company and alerted Liberal “fixer” Tony Nutt, who – the Australian Financial Review reports – ordered the immediate collection of the watches so that they could be returned.
Robert and Abbott complied – though a spokesman for Abbott denied it was on Nutt’s advice.
The spokesman told Guardian Australia that the two watches given to him were declared as well, though Abbott had also taken them to be fake. It wasn’t so much the gift, as the way it was given, he said.
“My understanding is that they were handed over in a plastic bag, as has been reported, and I think everybody was of the same view,” he said.
“They were declared in the normal way. As with most parliamentarians, it’s better to over declare than under declare but I believe Mr Abbott was of the understanding that they were fake, given the way that they were handed over, and, when it became apparent that they weren’t, they were handed over straight away.”
Asked by Guardian Australia whether Robert had, like Macfarlane, assumed at first the watch was a fake, a spokesman said there was “nothing to add to the story that’s not already out there” but confirmed that it had been returned.
Macfarlane’s office has been contacted for comment.
Less than a year later in August 2014, Robert, the then assistant defence minister, took what he says was a “personal” trip to Beijing with friend and Liberal Party donor Paul Marks to celebrate a mining deal.
He is now fighting to save his ministerial career as Labor accuses the prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, of failing to enforce his own standards.
Phillip Coorey writes in the Australian Financial Review that Roberts “should have learned from the watches to tread warily in China”.
The senior public servant Martin Parkinson will determine whether Robert breached the ministerial code of conduct with his trip to China.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 23:35
|
|
- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
Jason Clare talked today about the latest mess Malcolm Turnbull has made of his third rate #NBN.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw9AYLsV6m0
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 01:28
|
|
- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
I was riding on the purpose built bike track that runs along side the M7 in Sydney and I looked down to see some tosser riding on the road itself. The bike track is huge - like 40km. Dunno why he was special enough to be there.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2016 06:34
|
|
- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
What the gently caress? Apparently George Pell had a 'secret' visit to Australia last year. Even paying a visit to Ballarat?
via reddit: http://www.brokenrites.org.au/drupal/node/391
quote:
Despite his long-standing "health problems" as a 74-year-old, Cardinal George Pell makes frequent trips away from his Rome headquarters. For example, in March-April 2015, he made a secret trip by air to Australia, and then he returned to Rome in time to "appear" by video-link (instead of really appearing in person) for a public hearing of Australia's national child-abuse Royal Commission a few weeks later (in May 2015). The Commissioners had approved Pell's May 2015 video-link because of the alleged "difficulty" of Pell flying to Australia from Rome. The Commissioners did not know of Pell's recent secret trip. News of his recent secret trip leaked out during the May 2015 hearing. And Pell's video-link in May 2015 turned out to be a technological disaster. The Commissioners then asked Pell to appear in person at his next scheduled public hearing in Australia (in December 2015) but his lawyers sent a "sick note" (signed by one of his own doctors, not an independent one), citing his long-standing health issues as grounds for getting yet another video-link. His next video-link is to begin on 29 February 2016. Please stay tuned for the next episode.
Clearly, Pell is avoiding Australia while civil investigations are under way about church sexual abuse that occurred on Pell's watch.
Pell's secret trip to Australia in March-April 2015 included a visit to his home town, Ballarat, which is the town at the centre of church-abuse allegations (and the cover-up) in western Victoria. Pell's trip was revealed in the April 2015 edition of the magazine of St Patrick's College, Ballarat — the school where Pell had been a pupil. The magazine article, which has been seen by Broken Rites, indicates that Pell's visit to the school occurred about 27 March 2015, "during a short vacation in Australia". There is a photo of Pell, together with headmaster John Crowley, while touring the school to see its latest extensions.
The editors of this school magazine didn't realise that, by revealing Pell's visit, they were "letting the cat out of the bag". News of the school magazine article (and the secret trip) reached journalists in Australia during the Commission's May 2015 public hearing.
Even the Australian Catholic bishops' spokesman on Royal Commission matters (Mr Francis Sullivan, from the church's "Truth, Justice and Healing Commission") didn't know about the trip until journalists told him in May 2015.
It is not known what else Pell did during his May 2015 trip to Australia but it would have been an ideal opportunity to have discussions with his Australian lawyers and his communications strategists, to figure out how to handle the Royal Commission and the church's victims. These advisers would understand the tactic of having a video-link from Rome instead of Pell appearing in Australia in person.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2016 06:11
|
|
- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
Because he's literally a drop in the ocean of scum bag torture apologist pollies.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2016 09:43
|
|
- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
Is it just me or are those two poorly constructed sentences? Changes tense in the first then a total non sequitur second. It reads like a writing exercise from a kindergarten.
Rhodes Scholar in the making.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2016 10:17
|
|
- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
Another good article explaining Negative Gearing...
Negative gearing explained: will Labor’s policy make it cheaper for first home buyers?
http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/negative-gearing-explained/7192920
quote:It's pitched as the battle between young and old; the rich and poor; the investors who can buy housing that loses money, versus renters watching 'the dream' slip from their grasp.
If you know a tiny bit about housing policy, you know that negative gearing is contentious. It's an issue both sides of politics have studiously avoided for years. But then, a bit over a week ago, Labor announced they would do away with negative gearing on existing housing to make it easier for first home owners to enter the market. Turnbull hit back; Labor's policy would "smash" the value of house prices.
So, here's what you need to know to understand the negative gearing debate and whether it will actually make it cheaper for you to buy your first house.
Former ANZ Chief Economist Saul Eslake reckons "there's never been a more exciting time to be an advocate for winding back negative gearing"!
101: What is negative gearing?
If you buy a house that makes more money (in rent) than it costs (in repayments), then you can say it's 'positively geared'. Nice work, savvy investor, your mortgage is paying itself off.
But if the rent doesn't cover the costs, then you can claim that loss on tax (negative gearing). In the 2012-13 tax year, the average loss on an investment property for negatively geared investors was about $10,000.
You can then say to the taxman 'hey, can you knock that off my taxable income?' and reduce the amount you can be taxed by $10,000. So if you're earning $90,000 per year, the amount you pay tax on is $80,000.
Blah blah blah, why should I care?
Because investors are subsidised to buy housing they're losing money on, it makes housing a really attractive investment option which pushes up prices. Which makes it harder and harder for younger people to get into the market and you end up renting for longer.
CEO of Youth Action, Katie Acheson says originally negative gearing was pitched as a way to increase the number of houses being built, which would push down rent prices and make it easier for people to save for their deposit. But then, Katie says "negative gearing became a tax rebate for investors and for wealthier older people. So we started having housing prices being driven up by investors rather than actual home buyers."
Katie says younger Australians should be jumping up and down about negative gearing. "It's really a systemic inequality issue for young people... it's super important that we start talking about it now, because we really need to change this or young people will be completely left out of the market."
Would removing negative gearing on existing housing make it easier for first home buyers?
Independent economist Saul Eslake says "it's hard to think of any single measure that a federal government could take that would do more to help first home buyers than what Labor is proposing".
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, 93 per cent of home-loans in Australia go towards existing properties. Labor says by restricting negative gearing to brand new properties, it will drive investors to build more housing stock and reduce competition amongst existing housing. Because if you're an investor trying to reduce the amount of tax you pay, then investing in new housing will be your only option to access negative gearing.
Btw, Labor aren't proposing to reverse negative gearing arrangements already in place. If you're already taking advantage of negative gearing, then keep doing what you're doing.
"I don't like that very much, but I accept that's probably a compromise you have to make because there are almost 1.5 million people who've got them [negative gearing deductions]. And no opposition who hopes to be in government can afford to annoy that many people," says Saul Eslake.
Will Labor's policy drive housing prices up or down?
Malcolm Turnbull says all homeowners should be concerned; "Bill Shorten's policy is calculated to reduce the value of your home". Because Labor have given a timeline for when they would introduce the policy (June 30, 2017), it gives investors time to snap up properties before the changes kick in. That competition will likely see an increase in prices up to the cut off.
"There's obviously nine months where there will be a bit of a rush," says Saul Eslake. "You can imagine real estate agents and investment agents will be saying 'you've got nine months to gear up to the gills'. So that is a risk with what the Labor party is proposing."
Eliza Owen, housing market analyst at 'onthehouse.com.au' agrees prices for existing housing could surge and then drop off. But she says if people are a little more forward-thinking about it, that might not happen.
"If you rush in to buy a house over a million dollars, if after the negative gearing policies are implemented it's only worth half that much, then really you've lost out. Because essentially, once you take away the negative gearing benefits there will be a real dramatic fall in demand in that market which will affect prices."
And then Eliza says there's the problem of house prices surging for new properties (which you could still negatively gear). "Once you buy a new property you can negatively gear it, but if you try and sell it on, you can't negatively gear it because it's not a new property anymore. So the prices might fall dramatically there as well."
"I think it would have a really interesting effect on prices over time, but short answer is yes when you take away financial incentives from property it'll make prices go down, it'll be good for affordability."
Why retain negative gearing on building new houses?
"The argument for exempting new housing, is that investors might be encouraged to invest in building new houses which would add to housing supply, of which there is currently a shortage," says Saul Eslake.
But Eliza Owen says keeping negative gearing for new houses will make it really hard for first home buyers to get into new property. "But it'll be easier for them to get into the established market."
Will removing negative gearing on existing housing drive up rental prices?
This is a question ABC's Fact Check examined in detail recently. Negative gearing was removed temporarily between 1985-1987, and rental prices went up in Melbourne and Sydney (but dropped everywhere else). But there were other factors at play (interest rates and boom in the share market), so the conclusion both Saul Eslake and Fact Check came to was no, removing negative gearing won't drive up rental prices.
Will removing negative gearing hurt 'Mum and Dad investors'?
This is one of the government's main arguments. They say two thirds of people who use negative gearing have a taxable income of $80,000 or less. But that's after they've knocked the costs of their investment off their taxable income. Addressing the Press Club last week, Treasurer Scott Morrison said "70 per cent [of people using negative gearing] own just one property, and 70 per cent have a net rental loss of less than $10,000. It is one of the few opportunities that people on modest incomes have to try to get ahead. They have taken advantage of that, and I say to them good luck, and good on you."
Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen says using the same set of statistics, 64,000 people are claiming negative gearing interest deductions who have no income at all.
"The more relevant figure in my view is that according to the ABS [Australian Bureau of Statistics] in 2013/14, 72 per cent of the total value of investment property was owned by households in the top 20 per cent of the wealth distribution," says Saul Eslake. "And 51 per cent of the property investment debt was owed by the top 20 per cent of households."
"To put it another way, someone in the top tax bracket - that is with a taxable income of over $180,000 - is more than three times as likely to be using negative gearing than someone earning less than 80,000."
Why is housing so expensive in Australia in the first place?
Eliza Owen says there's a combination of factors that make Australian housing so unaffordable. She thinks the generation of baby boomers coming up to retirement have looked to property to reliably make money, because housing is considered a safe investment. "And then you have the benefits of negative gearing! It's virtually impossible to make a loss on property whereas shares can be a bit more risky."
Saul Eslake agrees first home buyers are being out-gunned by older investors. "Especially in the last three or four years when investors have accounted for more than half the amount lent to home purchasers, compared with about 30 per cent 12 years ago."
What about foreign investment? Eliza says there's no data to support the idea Chinese foreign investors are pushing up prices, citing a 2014 University of Sydney study that found they only made up 2 per cent of all residential property transactions in Australia.
What happens when you sell the property?
Capital gains is how much money you make (let's keep the focus on property) on a house when you sell it, compared with how much you paid for it. So if your parents bought an investment property for $200,000 when you were little, and now they want to sell that to fund their retirement, but the house is now worth $700,000 - well, they need to pay tax on the extra half a million they just made. That's called capital gains tax (and it doesn't apply to the house you live in).
Investors are given a 50 per cent concession on the capital gains tax on properties - so they only pay tax on $250,000 rather than the $500,000. Labor are proposing reducing capital gains discounts available to investors down to 25 per cent, so in the same example they would pay capital gains tax for $375,000 of the $500,000.
Has that answered your questions?
If not, hit us up in the comments and we'll put the best questions to an economist on air, during Wednesday's show at 5:30pm.
Editor's note: This article has been updated. In the original explanation of negative gearing, the example would have only applied to interest only loans, which is something people do for the first few years of the mortgage.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 03:16
|
|
- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
Thanks for this, I tried to explain negative gearing to my wife the other day and was struggling for a nice, concise summary like this.
That the stats back up Labor's plan helps too.
Interesting the Capital Gains Tax concession part. I didn't really know how that worked and it's way too generous in its current implementation.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 03:56
|
|
- Halo14
- Sep 11, 2001
-
|
Pfft. Just pay interest until death and then it's the banks problem. They'll likely pass it on to your next of kin but YOLO!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 29, 2016 08:53
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2024 04:54
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2016 06:17
