knockoff nige

Even faster since this government started running things, right?

Amazulu

They inherited the mess from the previous socialist government

Granted, the coalition done little to address this - the senate and fairy tale believing electorate have seen to that

So we have BS in Perth today promising billions for Metronet - great idea but we can't afford it (yes, this is partly down to state government mismanagement but this doesn't alter the fact that we don't have the money)

Large swathes of the electorate will lap it up - style over substance

Again

knockoff nige

They inherited sources of revenue that they quickly scrapped. But anyway. It's all Labors fault. Also, The LNP had their share of silly expensive policies that the senate helped block such as the ridiculous paid parental leave policy.

Beoz

They are all buffoons but sometimes you have to vote for the best one.

knockoff nige

Actually they are not all buffoons. Plenty are compulsive liars and plenty are living on a cloud but some are decent and those are the ones not likely to ever put themselves forward as prime minister. Those are the guys who should get it.

Amazulu

Yes that was a bad idea

15% GST (consumption taxes are one of the most efficient forms of tax - economics 101) and reduced income tax would cut the deficit quickly and stimulate the economy - but fairy tales get in the way and the electorate believes them

Beoz

It had some merit but at the same time was unfair for those who don't breed.

That said, we all are going to have a need for lots of people younger than us when we are old.

Interesting read this one.

Tony Abbott was right: Australia needs to catch up on paid parental leave

Again, TA failed to sell the idea, instead spent most of his time trying to describe how it would be implemented.

Another one of TA's horse before the cart moments.

ozzieeagle

This will be on TV in a couple of weeks.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvwU...ature=youtu.be

The unions will be saving the real hits to the last week.

Labour is going very well in the polling, so the Unions keeping a low profile at present...may not need their campaign after all.

GarryP

Interesting thing is it's a negative ad ("put the liberals last") rather than a positive one. Nobody has really put a positive policy forward during the entire campaign - its all been just bull.

Beoz

Hmmmm. 20% of Australians are in unions. Wouldn't you need more like 40% for it to be a hit?

Remember Ed Milliband?

Beoz

Good point. Out of ideas. Everything must be nearly perfect

GarryP

Part of the problem is that people react better to fear and threat than they do new ideas and opportunity.

You can see that with the coalition harking on about negative gearing and 'illegal immigrants' rather than actually having any plan to improve matters. They aren't builders, they are destroyers.

It would behove the unions to promote building, but to do that you have to have people turn away from fear, and you need to have that plan.

Someone has paid a marketing exec to create an advert that will have the desired effect, rather than being authentic to core strengths.

Beoz

Actually Labor are the destroyers. Depending which side of the fence you sit on the Labor plan on NG is to destroy the investment market for future investors.

Labor tried to destroy the mining market - instead China did that but Labor would have compounded the problem.

Yes Labor and their close knit ties with unions destroy business. Hell any strike destroys things.

Look at infrastructure investment under state Labor govts.

I think your idea of destroying is for a few rather than a collective group.

OzTennis

Why look at the housing market and NG purely from the investors point of view?

The proponents of the removal of NG argue that it will IMPROVE the housing market for first time buyers and owner occupiers with only one property.

They also argue that the government loses > $13 mill in NG tax savings for those with > 1 property. They also argue that those who are unable to NG are subsidising tax cuts for those who can (i.e. lower/middle income earners fund the tax cuts for what are essentially higher income earners).

> 90% of NG properties in Australia are existing houses (i.e. very, very few new houses are brought to the market by NG and the claims that fewer rental properties will be available if NG is removed are spurious - i.e. an existing house will be occupied one way or another).

Here's another attempt at discrediting which has gone awry:

Election 2016: Draft report intended to discredit Labor on negative gearing linked to Scott Morrison meeting

Beoz

Did I not say "Depends which side of the fence you sit on?"

Both sides have no plan to help the first home buyer. The Gratton Institute believes Labors plan will only knock 2% off house prices. This is no help whatsoever to a first home buyer. You need 20% and that is a housing crash. Is crashing the bubble a wise move with so much money tied up in property.

Agree. NG and CGT is a bad tax relief but it was put in there for a purpose.

What they really need is to skew the buyer types. This can only be done by a Robin Hood approach. Taxing the investor to give to the first home buyer. The FHB needs help and the investor numbers become less.

Its a mess.