All Activity

Fairly close, those numbers. If you take a net figure of promises kept (kept minus broken) it's 26 to 21 in Morrison's favour, so not much in it. I can remember John Howard copping flak on a lot of broken promises in his first budget after defeating the Keating government. The term core or non core promises was invented around then if my memory is correct.

This is where you should do a little more research before cherry picking. Every PM or political party has broken some promises. I touched on CGT already.. The reality is, as Albo said, something had to be done... It was getting worse and worse for the average Australian and that is not a good place to be. But, as I said, every political party/PM breaks promises.. some will definitely be intentional and some will be responding to conditions. For the record, I think the CGT promise as a lie and they had every intention of overhauling it. And, yes, while I agree with the outcome, he should have been more upfront about it.. Or maybe less upfront and vague about it. But, for the record, I looked up the number of broken promises between Albo and SFM. I have not validated these, but as a guide: [Edit] This is the result of an ABC/RMIT Fact Check.. In all honestly, there is not too much to draw from these as there is a big number in progress for the current government - some may fail for valid reasons and some may fail for political reasons. But my point is there is 20% of the SFM promises failed. All leaders/political parties lie or break promises. And quite materially by the looks (not calibrating size/importance of the promise). You can prattle on targetting the side you don't like and think the sun shines out of the posterior of the side you do like.. That is your prerogative. But don't be surprised if others take a different point of view and come back at you. I wouldn't worry too much about it.. If it isn't already a defence to defamation, a half witted lawyer could probably successfully persuade the court that a statement claiming fact is so devoid of truth that no average person could believe it to be true. (That is not legal advice by the way... )

I actually did touch CGT, and implied in it was the negative gearing (as it is part of a tax package that was disproportionately creating demand in an asset class against all other asset classes considered for investment). I suggest you read my post. I am prepared to stand behind what I say and provide references accordingly when required (which I am sure other forumites sometimes loathe the extents I will go to). It equalises treatment of one investment asset class.. and guess what. although the fundamentals would still include investment residential property in a portfolio for stability and growth, people (investors) are going knee jerk. And also, unlike other investment classes, residential property is for people to live in and build some security, The way it was being treated through preferential tax treatment was to artifically inflate the price denying millions of Aussies who aren't as cash rich as others a chance of financial security. A lot of young (and increasingly older) can't rely on the bank of mum and dad. To me, it is a positive step forward and it is not socialist. In fact the regime was in effect wealth socialism - artificially funnelling asset (or redistributing) to the more wealthy and already secure in society using tax incentives to inflate demand. You;re against socialism, but in a perverted way, it is redistributing the wealth - which is what socialism is about. It took a lot of balls to do the right thing as the backlash was always going to be huge. That to me, is the definition of leadership and one of the reasons why Albo has earned my respect as a leader. I still think he can do a lot better, but compared to the competition and many of his predecessors of both colours, he is not doing bad.

In the current international financial situation, no political party in a small nation such as ours has any control over the country's economy. If the Prime Minister was Taylor or Hanson or whoever is the leader of the Greens, the situation today would be exactly the same.

Got a better pic of the old Richardson drill today. It's a heavy old thing, a lot of cast iron and heavy steel plate where the mount has been modified. This is the way I'll mount it as a horizontal drive if the gearbox lube works out.

The Reserve Bank's charter doesn't say that.

The Reserve Bank want the Unemployment figure to be Higher.The formula is what it is and not decided by LABOR. Nev

Who mentioned the libs. I expect a lot from politicians and the last 30 years or so they have been below par. Albo is in power at the moment so he is the one that needs to lead by example. We are also told how good the unemployment figures are at the moment. From the ABS- employed persons (aged 15 and over) during the reference week as employed persons (aged 15 and over) during the reference week as those in paid work for at least one hour, unpaid family workers working one hour or more, or individuals temporarily away from their job or business under specific conditions. What a joke and misleading.

What do we want to know THIS for? Nev

You are very selective. We are doing pretty well compared with any country Still AAA rated economy. Tell me where you'd rather be living. The facts are there if you cared to reference them, but they would spoil your take on it. We are not even sure the Libs will survive. They don't exactly speak with any united voice. Nev

https://www.facebook.com/reel/29130341663283120

Make shit up like $275 off power bills, we won't touch negative gearing or CGT. Standby what I said, conman. He isn't the only one.

Be very, very careful. That statement could readily be taken as defamatory. It has been published on this site, so the site could be prosecuted, and maybe taken down.

You are the one who is making the statement. Would you look it up if I claimed that it was true that the Moon was made of green cheese? Remember, it is a custom of this forum that those who make claims of fact be prepared to openly provide references to the source of those facts.

Why don't you spend time convincing us just how bad he has been for Australians. The inflation you have at the moment is largely globally driven and Australia, which is heavily dependent on imports of fuel thanks to decisions made way back in the Howard era where Japan and China buys gas off us at knock down prices and on-sells for the profits. This denies Australians accessing their own resources at what should be these knock down prices, but also results is massively lost profits locally as a result and also increased input costs as we have to buy our energy at global rates. Sadly, your issue at the moment should be with Chump. The CGT reform - yep can be argued as a bit overboard for some asset classes and it will depend on where you sit in terms of the housing market. If you are a house owner in the cities, yep you are probably spitting a bit as the prices return to a more natural normal rather than the artificially high prices resulting from a disproportionate incentive to invest (and create unnatural demand) in an investment asset class because it was treated more favourable from a tax perspective than other asset classes. However, longer term, the prices will stabilise and those who recently purchased or use leverage to fund investment will be back in the black. But at the same time, it makes housing affordable for people.. who need housing.. Also, as I said unless you owe money on your house wyere you have seen your equity fall a bit, or you are using it as leverage, it will make no real difference as the price relative to other properties will be in synch... Pursuing net 0 is absolutely the right policy for both longer term energy security and a simple fact - it will be over the same amortisation period as fossils, be a lot cheaper. So, for the future of the country, this is vital and people who are wedded for short term pricing are just kicking the can down the road. And that is before the environmental costs kick in. There is only one developed and not too many major emerging markets that aren't pursuing renewables as a, if not the major source of generation. Yes, China is building fossil plants still; its demeand is insatiable, but its is building renewables at a much bigger rate. I am not sure where this sits, but at least a policy promise of the Albo government is to buy Australian. i.e. use public money to channel into Australian rather than foreign interests. As I said, I am not sure where it is. In the fuel crisis, Albos was far quicker than most other nations to reduce tax to reduce the burden on the consumer; many countries (such as the UK) didn't do that at all. If you compare the above to the previous conservative government (and I did a fuller analysis somewhere else), then largely Australia is better off than pursuing the LNP policies, and good luck to you if you think PHON's policies are going to result in an economic nirvana. There are some things that Albo needs to get a grip on.. definitely: Sovereign debit has increased past $1TN. Australia still retains it's AAA+ status with all major agencies, but this is something that needs to be reigned in. The Gas Excise should be applied. Look at Norway and Qatar to understand why. AUKUS is a joke - we could use that same amount to build a locally owned and controlled defence industry pumping out weapons that would really be of use to us. The Fair Work Act, I think is overly onerouos - not so much on the pay and conditions, but all of the other obligations it imposes. There was a case where an award was won under the fair work act because, as I recall, the employer didn't take appropriate steps to protect an employee from domestic abuse... I have to look it up, but it was along those lines. That is, to me anyway, clearly beyond the responsibility of the employer (maybe with some narrow exceptions). AI is coming and it is going to bite faster than people realise. Provision and structural changes are needed to insulate Australia from the worst. I am sure I have missed from both sides of the argument. Labor could do a lot better, but if we had LNP or PHON, they would also need to do a lot better if they implemented what they said they would... and they would have to do a lot more to even catch up to Labor. I am not a "socialist" by any any stretch of the word except one... I do think that people have to work for the economy, but the economy also has to work for the people. And I do believe in a fair reward for risk..Capitalism so far has the most effective allocation of resources. Of course, the fully competitive market can only ever be a theory, and I think you are mixing up true socialism with ensuring fairness in the markets. The disproportionate rewards compared to the risks taken especially at the multinational or large corporate level is currently obscene.

I love old industrial machinery. Today I picked up this old J.S. Richardson drill on marketplace and couldn't resist it for $50. There's way more value than that in the steel, electric motor and other components. Good old drills, made in Sydney in the days when we manufactured stuff and employed Australians. At some stage in it's career it's been converted from a pedestal drill to a wall mount. I already have a big industrial grade pedestal drill, so my first thought with this is to mount it like the second photo I've edited with a flip-around and a cutout. In other words, use the wall mounting plate as a base stand and do a bit of sideways stuff with it. I'll have a good look in the morning and check how that will fit with the gearbox oil level/ fill and drain plugs etc. in that orientation.

If you mean people who like facts not lies, your right. Us "lefties" don't respect people who make shit up to try push their opinion.

That's a tricky one. Often the leader of a party gets the job because he or she is the best performer on the floor of Parliament. That ability can sometimes also make them the best to sell their stuff to the media. Some ministers are ok at their jobs but are prone to embarrassing gaffs in front of the media so they get sidelined/insulated/firewalled, pick whichever term suits. Often the PM is left with the job of dealing with the media. At least they have their mandatory flanking noddies to keep them company. It puts a big workload on a PM, particularly if those under him/her are bigger idiots than he/she is. It's probably a fine line between overworking the PM and delegating too much freedom to ministers. You see the worst effect of the latter in some developing countries with the amount of corruption that free hand can result in.

Google albos media payments

Demand what you want. Look it up

How could anyone say he is a good prime Minister. He has no interest in helping Australians . I have to stop before I get in trouble again. Too many left wing socialists here.

I demand proof of that statement!

Albo has been trying to censor the media and social media for a long time. Even paying large sums of our money to tv networks.

I really think that which ever mob forms the Government, the person that Party puts in the position of Leader should not have to carry the ball for evry MInister in the Government. Those Ministers were chosen to attned to the operations of a particular area of government. I think that they should be the ones fronting the media. The captain of a sporting team isn't the one who is expected to score all the points for the team. The Prime Minister's role should be more about the international diplomatic side of Federal politics.

Times are changing. I was listening to a researcher on the ABC radio and he was talking about the younger generations getting their political information via social media. My brain sieve can't quote the figure he gave regarding those getting info solely from social media, but I was surprised how high it was. That's why Albo and other pollies are doing these social media gigs, to chase the younger vote. We boomers and those a bit younger are used to getting ours from traditional media.