Jerry_Atrick

On the basis that current aged voters would die out, yes. But it ignores two other things. First, and less likely, the new found popularity of one nation will result in those offspring and impressionable of those new found voters being conditioned into following... Of course, most of the new found voters probably have adult kds where it is too late (hence, less likely). But, as we age, our ideology tends to change - usually moderate more than flip.. But there are enough people on the boundaries that may keep PHON in popularity or even increase it (assuming every other factor stays the same). I just mentioned it as a possible outcome, but if UK experience is anything to go by - and indeed US experience - the electorate may well have had enough that something really bad has to happen before they change their tune. On any other electoral system, Farage and UK Reform would possibly be the second or likely third party in the UK House of Commons today - straight past the post averted that. Chump is in because of the protest vote - the die-hard MAGA base is not enough to give them more than a few states (yes, Chump is Republican, but lets face it, their national elections are usually based on the presidential candidates). Pauline#s rise is not dissimilar to Farage's.. disenfranchised population, structural unfairness, immigration concerns, etc. And now, a rise in the polls; the difference is Reform are now polling ahead of anyone else. Both parties have the same issues - candidate vetting is terrible, controlled by billionaires and open about it, offering cheap solutions to difficult problems, etc. It is likely, unless Labour in the UK turn things around quickly, Reform will be the next government (Conservatives are in the same position as the Libs). Then the shit will hit the fan and as the British are less rusted on, Reform will hopefully implode before they can do too much damage, or will at least be booted out and we will never hear of them or their people again. Although Albo is far less unpopular than Starmer, it is plausible that without Labor turning it around, Pauline could make a decent go of it at the next election.. definitely not a majority, but with preferential voting, you may well see quite a few One Nation taken seats in the House of Reps. That would give her enough to make a dent, but not enough to extend them the rope to hang themselves (metaphorically to those sensitive to Pauline). If Labor continue, then as long as ON don't royally screw up, they could be in for a treat in 2031. It is not that far away (and assuming no early elections called). At the polls stand today, they look to be the majority party on a "two-party" preferred basis, where if one substituted them for the Libs/Nats in that race. As it is, they are polling well ahead of the Lib/Nats. Once they are in, if they are, like Reform, they would likely screw everything up and we will never hear of them again. So, while I agree, they are a fringe riding a wave of discontent, there is a more than tight probability they will become a major at the next election and the libs will pay for it. Agreed. this is the major reason for voter discontent; it's just the billionaires are great at getting a manipulated message out to the population it is identity politics (pick whatever you like) that is the problem. She had so many "I don't do policy on the run" responses to basic policy questions - I would put her more like Joe BP - "Don't you worry about that!"

Whoa.. There were a few spicy pages I just caught up on. 🙂 I think it is fair to say the two party system is in transition. To what - who knows? I will leave the performance of Albo and his crew to the appropriate thread. However, it is clear that there is a perception that neither of the two majors are truly representing the majority of Aussies at the moment. And, from the polls, it is clear the libs at least (and possibly the Nats) aren't thought to be at all representing their traditional base. Labor, at least federally, seem to be not too far off their normal primary vote; I read it was somewhere around the 28% mark; not too much lower than the last federal election of, from memory, about 32%. At the same time, there is a perception (real or otherwise) that the gap is ever widening between the haves and have nots and that blame is being successfully laid at the feet immigration, which plays into both fear and bigotry. This is because more and more of what was the middle class is being squeezed more and more. For various reasons, which would take a book to go through, blame has successfully been laid at the feet of immigration. This results in a perception the immigrants are taking away previous little resources that the majority of the population have to fight for, and along comes Pauline with her silver bullet fixes to everyone's problems. The Libs had their time and between Morrison and Dutton (with a little Littleproud thrown in), screwed things up so royally, they were booted out (Albo technically won, but in the famous words of Bill Hayden - a drover's dog would have won that election). To his credit, he took an early lump in the form of the Voice, licked his wounds, and then did a reasonable job. But hubris seems to be setting in (early) as it inevitably does, and he is no longer looking like he is really looking after the majority of the people he purports to represent. Having said that, the loss of primary vote is probably not much more than a protest vote - yet. The Libs seem to be so far removed from reality, that all but their most ardent supporters seem to have jumped ship. It's hard to understand precisely what they stand for. If I was a betting person, I would suggest in 5 - 10 years, without a complete about-face, they will fade into oblivion. Which may leave a two party system - Labor and Phon.. Or more likely, some other party will spring up as the Greens seem to be marginalising themselves (or at least no one is covering them much anymore). Or there may be more parties, in which case it is likely to become lie some European countries where coalitions are formed and broken. Whilst I support the key budget changes on economic grounds, there is a lot more that can be done. And, people like David Pocock are using social media effectively to get a message across of what is wrong with Labor and the LNP. Just google or youtube him and you will see what I mean.

Don't worry, Marty; I can still input some Jerry-isms...

Thanks, Chaps.. Just saw this thread.. Been terribly busy at work.. Still am, but took a couple of days off while the missus and daughter go to London for some culture. And for some reason, they browser spell checker is working again! Back to it on Tuesday, but have a lot of personal stuff to catch up on.

I did.. but this house is taking a bloody long time and draining more funds than we imagined. , so every so often we have to pause to let them build up. Unf, this year, I made a bit of a blue of a decision because I was too busy at work to think things through and that cost be £25K as well.. So that has to be made up, too. But this week, things are back on, and it is some rewiring and all the decorative work.. If I don't sell the lot, I will subdivide, where I can sell the cottage to pay off the mortgage and then rent out the main house.

Mmmmm.. Cheese... Will be sampling the local stuff while out in Aus... It has some competition.

https://anotherconcept.co.uk/insights/ai-overviews-are-affecting-paid-search Indeed - it is worrying.. As AI just does harvest info, with less website content that will inevitably flow, bias is likely to creep into the answers it gives. Hmm... That is odd. The browser should pass everything in the address bar to the server in the URL and provide a valid server response. If you are adding -AI in the google search and not the address bar, the browser should pass it as well formed in the context of a POST or GET request parameter (I don't know off the top of my head which Google uses). It's not just Australia - it is all foreign countries.. And i have a feeling it is to try and strangle Anthropic as they have come into conflict with Chump. On the question of data centre and power usage, AI wil just going to get bigger. But, I have a feeling that while the AI consumption will surge and there will be an overall surge in consumption, as AI displaces workers, the total level of consumption will normalise lower. Firstly, you won't require as many commercial buildings to be lit up, or the IT servers to just maintain the desktop infrastructure, nor all the PCs, etc. Ironially, in the information age, most of the information workers will be put out of work, and that will alleviate the electricity demand heavily (well, maybe except for summer months, when a/c is switched on in the houses). It is not just the building and the desktop infrastructure - we will probably not need as many trams and trains running unless people replace their cars with public transport. Having said that, of course, EV takeup is higher so that may change things, but then again, solar and other localised renewables will take up some of the load. Secondly, enterprise server power consumption will be lower, too. This is because although companies will all need accounting systems, etc, everyone is moving this to the same data centres as AI (i.e. "the cloud"), and therefore, these servers will also house such systems, rather than separate servers, and their marginal use of electricity compared to stand alone use of electricity will be a lot lower. I have heard (not researched - so pls take this with a grain of salt) that SpaceX is looking to develop satellite based data centres - solar power is supposedly easily harnessed and using their satellites for networking, will be offering this as an alternative. However, I can't help but think of nefarious state actors tracking them and right at their most opportune moment, destroying them - something I am sure SpaceX engineers are thinking about. All AI models rely on being "trained" and machine learning. This is basically reading data - and lots of it - the more it consumes, the more statistically (not necessarily in reality) accurate it becomes. For example, if AI was around in 300 BC and it was trained in earth science data at the time, it would statistically deduce that the earth is flat and everything revolved around the earth. That would have been statistically valid, though inaccurate. Also, AI won't have been trained on everything and there just simply may not be the data available to be accurate. AI generally uses machine learning, which is an advanced probability calculation described by Bayes theorem (usually) across a lot of data. So, if the data is wrong, so is AI. But, that is the same for real intelligence, too. What the AI model does if it doesn't have much data on something, is go to the web. I would imagine it can't possibly eek out every tidbit of information, so it probably has some weighting algorithm to determine the most likely accurate sites to rely on. Whilst it doesn't get it right, it at least, in these cases, quotes its sources for you to check, which is a good thing.

I am travelling to Aus for a couple of weeks - up to a month in mid-July. I am guessing that will become a gripe for you fellas 🙂 It's not the flight, nor the destination, but the purpose. what I call YAMD - yet another mercy dash. At least this time, it is not for a couple of days. I will be between my brother's place in Canterbury and my mother's place in the Yarra Valley - as well as Port Arlington, where my brother has his retirement place. Sadly, my mum has been diagnosed with a terminal illness and I am coming out for the prognosis scan. Then it will be making arrangements after that. Also, both my brother and I want to get her wishes, because, the feeling when my father was in ICU being asked by the doc to play dog was not a good one. And that time will come, so I want us to be prepared - as I have prepared my family for my inevitable demise. All good things must come to an end, unf. But, it will be a recce trip as well, so not all gripes. I will take a look at a parcel of land I intend to build my "retirement" lifestyle on - and yes - it will be GA/RAAA based. In addition, I will try to nip up to Sydney to introduce myself to our Aussie office and see if there may be any offerings in the future move - which is not far, now - end of year max - will explain in the reno thread. I won't have time to do any flying, plus I don't have an Aussie medical at the moment (couldn't get a mygov id in time for my last medical here.).

My intention is to stay off the stuff completely until the end of September. At the moment, I am planning to return after that - no more than once a month but good wines rather than the table stuff at the moment.. Only with dinner. Which is a pain as I am going to be landing in Melbourne in mid-July, between Canterbury and the Yarra Valley for a couple of weeks.

Especially sweet since I thiink it was the Turkish coach stated they have a more talented side. I may even watch the highlights (I am not terribly impressed with FIFA, so am not watching the games generally).

It sounds sad, but today marks 3 months a good mate has not visited at all. He actually stopped visiting in mid Jan, but popped in in mid Feb when another mate visited. And again, very quickly met up with me when I met an old work colleague in Mid March - but it was just a very quick visit that time - only one glass of wine. Of course, that mate is Wolfie (and his cohorts). Funny thing is, I haven't missed it. I got my partner a bottle of Plantagnet Chardy (a personal favourite for what you can get here these days), which she duly appreciated. I did sneak a sip and say to her, "This is a good wine, right" to which she was quite agreeable. I didn't like it at all! The most tempting time to have a drink was when I was in Frankfurt a couple of weeks ago. It was lovely weather and we were treated to dinner at a tavern, where the beers looked so tempting. Even when I was at the cricket with some Aussie and English mates last week - in the social club so with nice sit down meal and a flowing bar - I wasn't tempted. I feel I have lost a friend - and it is, in this case, cause for a celebration (Now I have to ditch the confectionery)

Don't get me started, OT.. those big consultancies are the biggest scams on earth (Except, that I started with my earlier post - I think it was PWC that was consulting to the ATO on how to make changes to reduce the loopholes and were at the same time consulting to private corps on how to beat them).

The difference to what I wrote is that the transaction tax would not be able to be offset by firms on the tax paid by them by them on their inputs. What happens today is that if I am BAS registered, I charge GST on my accounts receivable invoices (output). However, I am also paying GST to BAS registered suppliers on my accounts payable invoices from the supplies I buy. These are the inputs. At BAS statement and GST payment time (commonly quarterly, but sometimes monthly and on low revenue companies, can be annually), I deduct the value of GST I paid on inputs/to my suppliers from the GST I collected on my outputs and remit only the difference to the ATO. Also there are many GST free items - mostly around staples health, school fees, and domestic rent, etc. Unlike the UK, where a firm can charge VAT (same as GST) on its products and not all input taxes are reclaimable - e.g. VAT on vehicles, Australia permits all of the input taxes to be claimable for such companies. The offset tax model is open to abuse, because once you allow the tax to be offset, people will find ways of doing it (as opposed to avoiding it altogether as in the case of the black market). The most common way is to route as many private purchases through the company as you can. Pre GST, there was a wholesale sales tax and if a company had a VS number, they could claim it to the supplier, who would not charge the tax. The family of a school friend of mine back in the day bought as much as they could through the company quoting their VS number to get stuff cheaper. I am sure that continues today across the board. There is also invoice fixing and all sorts of stuff. If you get rid of the ability to offset or deduct- and apply it to transactions across the board, it will work better. The thing you have to worry about is the shift to the black market. All those resources dedicated to investigating taxation compliance can be shifted to a simpler function of investigating black market activity. Andf, I don't think it will be much more than it is today - well at least in the UK, where VAT is 20%. How many people, ahem, already slip their tradespeople cash because the VAT/GST Man doesn't need to know everything? I don't because of the money involved in my reno (still going) is such that should a dispute be required to go to court, not paying VAT makes the contract illegal, which is then unenforceable. Also, a transaction tax that replaces all other taxes would have very few exemptions - as I mentioned earlier it could be exports, possibly rent and of course mortgage payments. The tax on investing I would argue would be on the brokerage and other fees as most assets are already second hand (i.e. shares). As I said earlier, a non deductible income tax for the wealthy to distribute to the less wealthy to offset the regressive nature could be used - and the tax would be nominal - nothing like today's income taxes.

Yes.. Of course they have consulting arms.. Which means the government could throw them money to consult on how to reign in the casr from the black market, to which those firms could consult to the big black market operators on how to get around the new ways of doing things.. just like what happens now in tax. 🙂

I quite like the idea of, I think it was @nomadpete's from some time ago about introducing a transaction tax - that is basically every transaction is taxed a percentage.. So, I did something not necessarily statistically valid and haven't yet validated any of it; and I think the idea would have to be refined (e.g. not to price us out of export markets, etc). I asked ChatGPT if we removed all taxes from Australians and replaced it with a flat transaction tax that is not able to be offset like CGT, and the transaction tax is applied at all levels in the Supply Chain, what would be the % required to replace the existing revenues of the government. To ChatGPT's credit, it did also inform me there are many variables and it needed refinement itself, but settled on 10%. I asked it what would be the cumulative impact on consumer prices (so not house transfers, financial investments, loans, etc), to narrow it down. I asked chat as I couldn't be bothered doing the compound math myself, and it said for a 3 stage supply chain process, 33%; 4 stage 47% an d 5 stage 63%. Ouch, but that is a raw value and it doesn't take into account some reduced costs on the way, but businesses would probably take these into profit for a time before competition started to take effect - as per the Whitlam years when he removed a lot of import duties. Also, note, you take roughly 10% off for CGT from those (not entirely accurate but for these purposes will do), as well as for some products (e.g. wine) the baked in taxes that are already there. Next I asked what would be the impact on net disposable income in quartiles from the lowest income earners (minimum wage) to the highest reported income earner. As expected, this would be regressive, but not by as much as I thought, with the lowest quartile being between 5% and 10% worse off, the next being between 3% and 4% worse off the third being between 3% a 12% better off and the top 25% of earners being between 15% and 55% better off. I didn't go into comparing to how much disposable income each quartile has against some average cost of living for a comparison as that was not the purpose of the exercise. And note, this does not include state and council stand alone revenue and I have not validated how Chat came to its answers. But it leaves some food for thought for a complete tax overhaul along these lines. The obvious risk is an increase in black market activity to circumvent the taxes. Leaving that aside, I asked Chat what non deductible tax to apply on a proportional basis to the 3rd and 4th quartile to allow the government to distribute income to the 1st and second quartile to ensure that the bottom two quartiles can be directly distributed the money such that they will be no worse off - i.e. net disposable income is the same as the current process. It was 0.55% for the third quartile and up to 2.0% on the 4th quartile. Of course, there will be lots of statistical error in these numbers, but it gives a guide that for no other than a consumption tax, the bottom two quartiles cost of living will not change, yet the top tier will be better off and with a much smaller PAYG tax rate. Of course, it leaves room to move a little more income to those on lower income and according to Chat, around 4.5% applied to both tiers would make the bottom two tiers 10% better off than they were. This would leave the third tier up to 7.5% better off and the top tier up to 49% better off.. and the government still gets the same money. It would probably be in large corporate taxation. They would now have to pay the tax where a lot don't pay anywhere near where they should be. And then you can factor in additional taxes that we should be charging like the fossil fuel export royalties to the correct level, and you have a far more fairer, flexible, and targetable taxation system. Of course, this is rudimentary modelling.. There are second and third order factors that have to be addressed. For example, the cost of compliance (accounting, legal, etc) will drop massively as there aren't complex accounting rules required for taxation. This will result is a lower level of transactions and therefore, tax. It may result in increased unemployment as you need less para finance and para legals as well as less tax compliance people in ATO, and if we went federal for all funding (local and state), less public servants at that level collecting, keeping track of, etc. Also, less transactions to billing providers, software, etc. Which can increase government costs (welfare) and reduce taxation, which can increase the transaction tax required, or increase other taxes such as fossil fuel royalties, etc. But,if we are looking at fairer taxation, then surely the whole system needs reform. (Sorry for the long post.. first day off for ages.. and I am in a boring meeting).