Australian Charity Party

[utility]

I hope people get across the messages and support this as a concept. I'm sick of the crap in Canberra (of all colours), and this is much better than supporting the araldited career pollies.

http://www.australiancharityparty.com.au/Home

Worth watching the short vids and reading the FAQs to understand what it is all about. It is very different and not sure if this has taken off anywhere in the world before.

 

[Moo]

So you'd rather support and give power to a party that basically just lists motherhood statements on the basis they will donate their electoral funding?

Yeah can't see any risk there.

 

[utility]

In all likelihood they will not get enough votes for a seat (like most smaller parties), but their preferences can be directed such that the recipient has to give up their electoral funding to charities for preference votes. In other words, they (the major parties) can choose between votes and dollars, but not both.

I think that's a great idea. And most people are unaware of the political party welfare (~$300M in last 20 years and rising).

Do you really think (most) people are satisfied with the status quo?

 

[Long Live HFC]

It’s not “political party welfare” ffs.

 

[Moo]

In all likelihood they will not get enough votes for a seat (like most smaller parties), but their preferences can be directed such that the recipient has to give up their electoral funding to charities for preference votes. In other words, they (the major parties) can choose between votes and dollars, but not both.

I think that's a great idea. And most people are unaware of the political party welfare (~$300M in last 20 years and rising).

Do you really think (most) people are satisfied with the status quo?

No, but adding a party that effectively is buying votes is hardly an improvement.

To think that they would direct preferences using this, is even more distasteful .....I'd pay not to have Family First or Fred Nile in the Senate (these are the parties that would deal not the majors).

The $'s we are talking about directing to charity here is bugger all in comparison to the dollars that the elected officials will control. It's their policies, quality of candidates and strength of political will.

We want to make a change, stop voting for political parties blindly in the Senate and put in some quality candidates would be a nice start.

 

[Taylor]

Am I to believe that there isn't a group of people here who will be paid a handsome sum for administering this party/business model?

The cynic in me thinks this is a great capitalization on public perception of politics being in the toilet, someone has identified that simple clean and friendly ideals make a disaffected and disinterested voting public feel like they have made a contribution.

 

[pokerspiv]

In all likelihood they will not get enough votes for a seat (like most smaller parties), but their preferences can be directed such that the recipient has to give up their electoral funding to charities for preference votes.

They need 4% of the primary vote to get electoral funding, that's worth a senate seat in any state, after preferences.

It's extremely rare for a minor party to get enough votes to receive electoral funding.

 

[Taylor]

They need 4% of the primary vote to get electoral funding, that's worth a senate seat in any state, after preferences.

It's extremely rare for a minor party to get enough votes to receive electoral funding.

Every business runs a risk.

 

[pokerspiv]

Every business runs a risk.

Not sure what this means. There's virtually no chance they will achieve 4% in their first few years of existence.

 

[Present Not Past]

Maybe someone needs to start the How to Vote Properly Party.

 

[Taylor]

Not sure what this means. There's virtually no chance they will achieve 4% in their first few years of existence.

Clive Palmer got 5.49% House of Reps and 4.91% Senate vote.

 

[pokerspiv]

Clive Palmer got 5.49% House of Reps and 4.91% Senate vote.

Clive Palmer had billions to spend on advertising. I assume that a party that promises to give all their money to charity will not.

 

[Borry]

I wonder how many children could be fed from the amount of money spent on their advertising.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Slax]

I just like the logo, takes pork barrelling to a whole new level

 

[Richard Pryor]

I can't be the only one who thought this was going to somehow be a thread about the Labor Party.

In theory I support getting as much money out of politics as possible, but in practice I think you'd just end up with guys like Clive Palmer spending their personal funds on advertising campaigns.

 

[Chief]

This might be one way to make your vote more than just a purely symbolic act.

 

[Moo]

This might be one way to make your vote more than just a purely symbolic act.

Do you wear a toga and laurel wreath when you vote?

 

[Chief]

Do you wear a toga and laurel wreath when you vote?

Your vote counts for as close to zero so as to be indistinguishable.

Your vote will change absolutely nothing. It is an illusory mechanism that fools individuals into thinking they have agency.

 

[Moo]

Your vote counts for as close to zero so as to be indistinguishable.

Your vote will change absolutely nothing. It is an illusory mechanism that fools individuals into thinking they have agency.

Your vote achieves nothing, our vote achieves Clive.

 

[Chief]

Your individual vote did not achieve anything.

Even when the cumulative effect gave a small group of people the balance of power the system was changed so it couldn't happen that way again.

Electoral laws allowed something unpredicted to happen, so they changed the law.

See also Qld (and international) laws like voter ID rules making it harder, if not basically illegal, for the poor to vote.

 

[pokerspiv]

See also Qld (and international) laws like voter ID rules making it harder, if not basically illegal, for the poor to vote.

Ok, I'll bite.

What's this new law that is going to make it hard for poor people to vote?

 

[Chief]

Laws are in place.

On mobile so off the top of my head voter ID - poor people, people on the fringes are less likely to have sufficient ID to vote.

Registration - Howard govt removing the extra time people had available to register to vote after election was called. Poor people, students, first time voters less likely to have current registration.

To the US where the vote is forfeit for certain types of criminal records. Again, voter ID laws, plus under-investment in voting facilities.

Independent members get up in senate through preferences deals. Laws proposed (enacted?) to make it harder to register a political party so this is less likely to happen in future.

Recent study revealed US gov't policy consistently matched business preferred policy over voter polls and public sentiment. Do we want that here ? Certainly heading that way.

Basically the individual vote means virtually nothing, and if you find a way to make it effective they change the law.

 

[pokerspiv]

Laws are in place.

On mobile so off the top of my head voter ID - poor people, people on the fringes are less likely to have sufficient ID to vote.

Why?

 

[Chief]

Why?

Because I'm not at my desk.

 

[pokerspiv]

Because I'm not at my desk.

I mean: Why are poor people less likely to have ID?