Jerry_Atrick

I know the collectibles CGT wasn't introduced by Albo et al, howeve, Labior did introduce CGT in 1985 as a more equitable tax. At the same time, it did reduce income and some corporate taxes. However,the reforms were only at the top marginal tax rate so, with the exception of bracket creep, don't impact too many Aussies. Yet the thresholds for the tax to apply haven't changed since 1985. And even then, for the average punter - even a hobbyist. There is no threshold for a reasonable turnover as a hobby (i.e. selling off say one stamp to fund the purchase of another). AAlso not being able to offset against losses of othe CGT assessable asset classes is also pernicious. The cultural comment was aimed at the Aussie governments as a whole. Not just Albo... Not indexing thresholds, for example, is a cultural thing,. It is niot necessarily the coal face workers I am talking about. Is the CGT a stealth death tax? Yes.. In Australia, you don't pay inheritance tax on receiving the property, but when yu sell it. Many people sell the property (or want to).. so you have to pay the tax. It effectively defers the inheritance tax payable. It is better than the UK though, where death taxes are payable on property recived > GBP 250K per person and the taxes payablke on inherited pensions can be up to an effective 80%. I am setting up our property (which is diminished with this house) such that it is owned by an Aussie company,, and the kids can derive rental income so as not to ave to sell it. They can then use the equity to fund hopefukly fund further investment/growth.It is about the most tax efficient way of doing it..

Well, I hope we make a lot of money from it and they are building us an effective iron dome

I neglected to include the difficulty of enforcement (train/phone at the time), but if when you sell someone wants a receipt, you are going to be, if only slightly, a little more at risk because the next bloke nay get audited and he produces a receipt from you. Granted, the risk is tiny, but regardless $500 for a single item that doesn't have an exemption for, say not having up to a reasonable amount of the type of collectable for normal use whether you can prove it is for normal use or not is scummy and shows they may be prepared to use it against the little people when there are far bigger fish to fry. It's about a culture as opposed to the probability of enforcement... IMHO

Farq.. I agree with PM.. it will bring a lot of ordinary people into the net. $500 is not a lot these days and unless you can prove what you have bought is used on a frequent basis, it will be classed as a collectible and if you sell it as yiu don't use it anymore and you make a profit, you pay. But if you make a loss, you can only offset that loss against other gains on collectibles you sell within the tax year.. not even other CGT payable assets let alone your total assemble tax. This is what I call pernicious tax... And Google tells me thar the official rate of inflation isn't taken into account, but some formula applied by the ATO, which is usually lower than the inflation rate. This is what I call a pernicious tax or a money grab. There is a carve out for personal use, but you have to prove it and it cant be occasional; it has to be frequent.. In theory, that jewellery necklace bought for wearing on the wedding day and only dragged out for special occasions will he caught.. so yeah, it will affect a lot of ordinary people.

As there is a thread about Chump already, how about we make this about the "average American". Firstly, what is the "average American"? Or do we mean the stereotypical middle class American - and even this is hard to define as their preferences and attitudes can vary differently between states. But how does this correlate to their rise in economic and political power? And concentration of that economic and political power. Don't forget, the US economy was originally built on some of the most oppressive largesse compared to its peers - slavery, suppression of workers rights, etc. Even today, not a rise since 2009 of the minimum wage.. very little leave entitlements, virtually no redundancy rights, etc. at least compared to its peers. And let's not forget, the leader in a democracy, of which it still was in 2025 when Chump was elected, is the result of a majority of votes or seats or states or whatever, in accordance with the electoral laws and systems. In this case, in 2025, Chump was able to attract the popular majority of voters as well as states. Yep, I feel sorry for the Democrat voters, and for America not having what it considered a better option. But ultimately, they knew what he was going to do, knew he would do it and some cited that is why they voted for him. As a result, I don't feel so sorry for the Americans.. they made theiur bed (if not all of them - but that is how it works). In fact, I could argue the current administration doesn't break with their historical past, particularly with respect to avarice. I do feel sorry for the rest of the world (or at least the US allies) that bought into the US, had no say, and now have to deal with the fallout.

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).

I have to admit; I am struggling to see what the issue us, except that a property that has been used to reduce your normal tax liability is now assessable - and still at under the marginal rate they would have used the property to reduce from. It is in effect still a deferment of tax. Yes, I know that the reduction of your assessable income during the negative gearing years are a loss made thanks to the interest payment and rather generous depreciation rules, but the reality is, you can't offset the costs of establishing any other investment against your PAYG income - although happy to be corrected in the case of sole proprietorship or partnership - so why housing? What leaves a sour taste is the excuse of the fairness of the tax system when the government still allows transfer pricing and does not tax our fossil fuels and other assets for big corps properly.

Hmm.. (Added bold) How am I defending it, exactly? I am putting other points of view as I see them. Regardless of how bad Chump is, there are others doing it under a pretence they are working for the people. I merely gave examples. But I think people are getting sick of being taken advantage of.. Have they got it worse under Chump? Yes, of course. But do they care? I would argue for an increasing number, no, because they probably feel that they are already at the stage that they can only get their head above water for the odd gasp of air, so they don't care if it gets worse. It isn't only economic; it is cultural as well - perceived or real - that they are being left behind socially as well. More and more middle classes have less and less... is the feeling. In my case (of course, UK), my heating bill has quadrupled in 6 years... quadrupled. What about Australia's gas scam, where the Australia institute report that the Japanese government make more from Aussie gas than the Australian government - money that could be used for better education, health, lower energy costs, and the like. Yet, what does Albo (and the libs before) do about it? Nothing while the industry lobby pays a good whack of money to party coffers for the odd lunch. Chump campaigned on doing much of what he has done. People knew, or ought to have known most of what was coming. We all did. His Doge, his tariffs, his cosying to Putin in deference to Ukraine, etc.. ICE and undocumented immigrant deportations; the wall, ignoring the constitution; They were openly committed to during the election campaign, despite him distancing himself from project 2025 at the end of the election but never what he was going to do. On the other hand, I recall in these fora a disagreement about the utility of secrecy of the NACC, and it wasn't long before the conduct of the NACC proved my position - that Labor should have enacted - as they enthusiastically promised prior to the election - public hearings and a transparent NACC. When they got into power, what happened? Secret hearings. It may be small in the scheme of things, but a) it is not isolated; and b) it is seen as them protecting their mates from misconduct. That leaves a foul taste as does all other coverups and stealth operation, especially if you voted for them in good faith of keeping what should be fairly simple election promises. People are now sick of it... Chump is a product of that - a protest vote - people probably knew they were not going to be better off; for many they are not worse off or if they are, it makes no material difference. So, may as well stick it to the establishment. Do you think Farage, or Hanson, or the other European ultra right would start becoming successful if they weren't/ We often forget there is a silent majority, and now they are starting to no longer remain silent. Their motivation may be valid if the actions aren't. If you are not as angry about what your government is doing as you are about Chump, I would argue a) you don't really know what is going on in your back yard; b) you don't care; or c) your dislike is so profound of Chump (for which there is nothing wrong with such a dislike - mine is very profound), that you're not taking that big an interest in your backyard. I agree, other countries don't proactively air much Aussie news in the MSM; but today, it is very easy to find reliable news and facts today in any country that doesn't black out its internet.

Warning - Big post incoming At least he doesn't hide this. He is quite brazen about it.. It is neither a good thing that he does it nor thaty he is brazen about it. But it is there for the electorate to see it. Let's compare to Australia. Australia: APS employees have to sign an NDA and are under threat of losing their jobs or as we have seen, jail foe whistleblowing (as evidenced).. Everything is hushed up rather than at least made public what is happening, and often who is the beneficiary. I don't recall Dutton yelling from the rooftops giving some dodgy one man operation in Kangaroo Island a massive contract to do not much; in fact he was desperately trying to hide it. The Robodebt royal commission - think about it.. the sealed section of a public enquiry - where all the evidence was heard in public - to not subjudice potential criminal investigations against prominent politicians. How long since? What criminal prosecutions have been made? The NACC made secretive by default at a time where the Labor Party prior getting into government made strong promises of it being public? IBAC in Victoria, where an ex anti corruption commissioner was quoted in The Age a couple of days ago calling it to be made public, ironically, in the same way as the NSW ICAC. Oh, and I don't hear Albo coming out about how great those fossil fuel industry reps are paying multiple tens of thousands to the Labor party for the privilege of paying multiple thousands per head to anaonyous lunches with ministers and guess what - fracking has been approved in the Kimberly's - one of the last pristine water courses in the world. Or the Beetalooo basion contact, the Adani project, etc. We could go on.. and that is just the Labor party - the one the Juice media labels the less ship party.. Think about the crap the previopus lot was involved with, and you start to get the picture. What was meant by my American friends is you get to see it for all its glory/gory, and you can make your decision. One the first - I think you answered it. Chump is transparently corrupt. You get what you see... The electorate can then make a decision if the "benefits" he provides is worth the corruption and misconduct he commits (allegedly ;-)). We don't see what we get, but we get it and the consequences, anyway. That is the only bit about transparency. On the rest, my above bit should have addressed the climate change/environment bit. Yep - Chump takes it to the next level, but our pollies of all flavours would seem to sell out to the extent our electorate will put up with it just enough for them to make whatever it is they want and move on. BTW, check out the carnage to (I think ti was - but will have to look up later) Darling Down river system to keep the cotton growers happy.. Chump brazenly and transparently puts morons to do his bidding in charge of departments. Are you telling me the precious Libs didn't put morons in charge? And that Labor's front bench are sans morons? Even people with experience in their portfolio can be morons and we spend a lot of time criticising non Chump leaders for doing moronic things. Governments all the time will deploy as many tricks as possible to circumvent democracy to pushing their agenda. Chump doesn't hide it and has used the US constitutional flaws to full advantage while the democrats have been asleep at the wheel to protect the constitution - and some bad thing as well. But the point is, people can see it and judge for themselves. When pollies try hiding things, it leaves a much more bitter taste in ones mouth. I agree that there was Obama envy that crept into a lot of decisions. But I am not sure that the Iran agreement was really contributing to long term world wide peace. The Paris Agreements? All 198 countries have signed up to it except three - Iran, Libya, and Yemen. US has subsequently withdrawn. All remaining countries have technically implemented at least one law related to the Paris agreement. There is not a lot of consensus on how many are actually meeting all or a material component of the accords, but according to the Climate Action tracker, fewer than a dozen (less than 10%) have laws that are fully compatible with the Paris Agreement. So, Chumpo leads the world, but he is not alone in not meeting or ignoring international agreements (BTW, Australia has basically ignored its requirements under the Refugee Conventions for a very long time). If you don't think Australian governments haven't shut out media organisations, think again. It is more difficult now because of the reach of two in particular in Australia, but Jeff Kennett was one that comes straight to mind when he was the premier in Vic, threatening to limit media access. Australian governments for years have used more subtle measures - such as first access (i.e. leaks) to manipulate the press. And it doesn't mean absolutely nothing to my friends.. But what they dislike is a government that hides the ship it does, and as you can see, it is not like other governments are doing them a favour. It is a sad state of affairs. Remember, in the polls the electorate didn't like either of the main candidates. The democrats didn't do themselves a favour by keeping Biden on, who, I am sad to admit, was beyond his use by date. No one I speak to says Chump is a win; they just see it as no bigger loss in their lives. Agreed.. to say the US people aren't thinking when they pass judgement I find a little conceited, to be honest. These people live there and have to make do. I never said they thought he was good. but for them, in their situation, it is no worse than others before (of both colours), and they can see what they get. It's so brazen, it is not hidden. Again, it doesn't mean they are saying it is good. The USA practically stopped being the land of opportunity for most many years ago. There has been a progressive squeeze on the middle class for longer which has left little extra capacity to get ahead. Most of your tech bros and billionaires are not from middle class families, regardless of what their PR says. For small business, it is still probably the same as when I used to live there. Take big risks, hope it pays off. In fact, AI will probably make it a bit easier in some ways. But, yes, I agree with this. That doesn't mean he is not transparent. It means he has probably accelerated USA's decline.. But here's something to think about. I was paying network engineers $120K in San Francisco in 1999; today, in the same place they earn about the same. The obvious result is lower standard of living progressively, while in government a lot of the representatives of the lobbyists have had a field day. People feel betrayed, and they are voting accordingly. Until pollies get that through their thick skulls, Hansons of this world will benefit. Many of these systems in better countries are seen by the population as failing them (the law is an ass, ambo ramping, etc). Wars are waged all the time.. Chump isn't the first to do a stupid war and won't be the last. People are sick of suffering by themselves and want the pollies to suffer as well. It may be worse for them under a Hanson, Farage, and indeed, Chump.. But they are now beyond caring. One of the inadvertent/unintentional consequences of el Chumpo's narcissism is that it is all there for the electorate to see. They can make their mind up relatively easily// Or they may be saying to the adults in the room, we're happy to vote you back in, but this time, listen to us and act on it, or we will do it again. This is no different to a lot of the donations made to political parties in Australia - only the scale (for the record, Australian parties seem to accept less before it looks like a conflict of interest action takes place). That is my point. We see it differently to the locals. That does not mean they are not thinking about it.. Remember, the UK has gone Farage, Denmark has gone very right - Denmark! Germany has. USA always has been. And now Hanson is making a breakthrough. We all see things differently. My friends in the US I haven't caught up with later posts (it took a couple of days to get this done, I am that busy at the moment). But I really wish people would look in their own backyard as well.. There's also a lot to fix there.

That's your opinion; theirs, from their experience is different. Congress has not raised the minimum wage since 2009, for example. Obama did it in his first year - nothing else 8 years on, Chump 1, nothing else; Biden, de nada; Chump 2 nothing. The average US citizen couldn't give a stuff about the rest of the world. What they mean is, it is all there to see. Apart from the Like on Truth Social question, nothing else in your post has anything to do about whether the government is transparent or not.

I haven't been on the thread for a while. I have just caught up with it. And, not much has changed. Chump makes stoopid decisions, divides his electorate, breaches the law, uses offensive diplomacy, and is blatantly corrupt. I am thinking it is a ploy to keep us wedded to the current and forget about what he had previously done. The yanks voted for him; they knew what they were getting and they got it. Unf, it has ramifications around the world. The democraps (intentional) aren't offering the US population any real alternative to vote for. Wasn't a senator by election or something just done with a MAGA maniac elected? The yanks don't like him, but the dislike the others even more. I read the news, sigh, and hop his reign of facism is over before he inflicts irreparable damage. Europe is heading in a s similar vain, albeit somewhat constrained. The UK is more so heading that way, with odds on Farage being the next elected PM. Pauline seems to be gaining popularity over notoriety. People are putting up with this crap because they have had enough of the status quo. Yep, they are getting shafted, but they are under no illusion they were getting shafted. MY US friends, albeit admitting it is a sad state of affairs, don't think it would be any better under anyone else, but at least there is transparency.